Bank Locked Us In without consent False Imprisonment

emilianozapata

Westie983 wrote: »

This is standard practice when moving cash across the banking hall, or they have access to any ATMS or IDM machines. The closure is minimal as soon as the cash or doors are closed the door is opened.

Hopefully this has reassured the OP that there is nothing untoward by this process and distress and inconvenience would have been minimal.

Westie983

No, thats not true. I contacted the banks helpdesk and they were both horrified and had never heard of it before. (Perhaps because it's unlawful).

emilianozapata

rr755507 wrote: »

I had to prove my identity in Halifax a few months ago. While they were faffing with my passport, they had to move some physical money about which meant locking the doors. I got locked in for around 15 minutes. it was a little bit weird, but there are much bigger things to care about.

Some people like to be hit with whips. Others like to spend the day having all their decisions made for them dressed as babies. Consent is key, and that is why we have laws.

" they had to move some physical money about"
Yeah they just 'had to' like having an itch. They just couldn't stop themselves huh? Were they juggling it too? Rubbing it all over themselves? Or perhaps you mean 'they wanted to move it there and then and decided they would not wait' or maybe you're just making it up. All I know for a fact is they did not have to do it. They have choice. Like all adults should. I'm sure you agree, as in having the choice not to be locked in a room.

Thanks for the input. I won't be responding further to you.
It's interesting to know how many passive people there are out there. Defending nothing.

EachPenny

emilianozapata wrote: »

No, thats not true. I contacted the banks helpdesk and they were both horrified and had never heard of it before. (Perhaps because it's unlawful).

No, that's ^ not true.

You spoke to one CSA on a helpdesk who has probably never set foot in a bank branch (as an employee) in their life and they have expressed an opinion which accords with yours. You now believe them over everything else you might be told because that one employee confirmed your bias.

EachPenny

emilianozapata wrote: »

Some people like to be hit with whips. Others like to spend the day having all their decisions made for them dressed as babies. Consent is key, and that is why we have laws.

" they had to move some physical money about"
Yeah they just 'had to' like having an itch. They just couldn't stop themselves huh? Were they juggling it too? Rubbing it all over themselves? Or perhaps you mean 'they wanted to move it there and then and decided they would not wait' or maybe you're just making it up. All I know for a fact is they did not have to do it. They have choice. Like all adults should. I'm sure you agree, as in having the choice not to be locked in a room.

Thanks for the input. I won't be responding further to you.
It's interesting to know how many passive people there are out there. Defending nothing.

How would you know this for a 'fact'?

The bank staff could of course exercise their choice and refuse to follow company procedure.

When the ATM runs out of money they could say that they will not refill it because to do so might impinge on the liberty of customers in the branch.

If they continue to say this then their managers may exercise their choice to discipline them.

So when considering their choices, which do you think they would prioritise? Providing a good service to the majority of customers, not being disciplined, and keeping their job, or not doing their job in case someone reports them to the police for unlawfully imprisoning them while the door to the bank is locked for a few minutes. :think:

JuicyJesus

Oddly bank staff couldn't give a sh*t about you being inconvenienced if the alternative is them potentially being shot or beaten for cash. They have to vary the times they service machines randomly because otherwise it could lead to people noticing a pattern and therefore shooting/beating/whatevering them for the cash. This means that sometimes they need to do it while the branch is open and customers are inside.

Get over it. They're not going to change it and put themselves at risk because of your hysterical whinging.

John_G_Jones

emilianozapata wrote: »

"You are not going to get the help you asked for here apparently"
I already have. But thanks for the input. I've edited this as the amount of abuse on this thread has made me somewhat cynical. I've had some good advice earlier up the thread though. Thanks for the input.

Why are you not willing to consider the possibility that everyone else is right and that you are being ridiculous?

I honestly can’t imagine any vaguely normal adult human whining on as you have done after being mildly inconvenienced for a few minutes.

What’s the actual story here, what is really upsetting you about the bank? No-one will believe that a normally adjusted adult could be so upset over such a trivial event.

elsien

emilianozapata wrote: »

No, you are wrong.


And I would helpfully refer you to any quote on civil liberties, the mental capacities act, or any other wonderful quote involving those who allow erosions of rights and liberties hard won.

Only the police or individuals in position of especially designated authority, or highly exceptional circumstances can be used to mitigate/except the above.

Thanks for your input though. Always fascinating to see the views of those living in the free world.

I'd like to helpfully refer you to the fact that deprivation of liberty under the Mental Capacity Act only applies to people who lack capacity around their care and support needs. People who have capacity cannot be subject to a deprivation of liberty in that context. And it doesn't apply to 5 minutes in a bank. Wrong bit of law.

And to save you the effort, feel free not to respond further to me.

[Deleted User]

Hi emilianozapata, you've obviously come to the wrong forum with this type of complaint. It seems to be stuffed full of people who are only here to ridicule and mock people with a genuine grievance. I'm not sure how this turns them on, but it obviously does.


You have a valid point. Thinking about it, your tactic should have been to order them to release you immediately, and if they failed to do so, leave via a fire exit. If the fire exits were locked then a report to the local fire brigade should definitely have been made. To me, they are out of order doing this, even if you were only inconvenienced for a few minutes. Write to the head office telling them if it ever happens again you will immediately leave via the fire exit.

JuicyJesus

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

Hi emilianozapata, you've obviously come to the wrong forum with this type of complaint. It seems to be stuffed full of people who are only here to ridicule and mock people with a genuine grievance. I'm not sure how this turns them on, but it obviously does.


You have a valid point. Thinking about it, your tactic should have been to order them to release you immediately, and if they failed to do so, leave via a fire exit. If the fire exits were locked then a report to the local fire brigade should definitely have been made. To me, they are out of order doing this, even if you were only inconvenienced for a few minutes. Write to the head office telling them if it ever happens again you will immediately leave via the fire exit.

What an insane idea.

They're not going to put their staff at risk by changing policies which are expressly intended to maintain the safety of both staff and, ultimately, customers as well.

Exodi

Oh wow, this is undoubtedly the most ridiculous thread I've ever read.

I had to fly to Germany last week for work... I didn't really want to go... reckon I could claim being on a plane was false imprisonment? They also refused to open the doors when I asked - I L L E G A L much?