letter from Santander asking for a lots of information

WillPS

Shakin_Steve said:

WillPS said:

Shakin_Steve said:

WillPS said:

They're a bank. If they deem you to be a risk then they can simply close your accounts. Rather than doing that they're putting a process in to place with the intention of allowing you to clarify/derisk yourself.

It's extremely arduous but you as a customer have an option of simply moving your banking elsewhere if you don't like it.

Yes, of course, perfectly acceptable behaviour. The banks have every right to browbeat and threaten an elderly lady when ringing out of the blue. The ombudsman will no doubt find that the bank's behaviour was perfectly reasonable, given that she perfectly fits the profile of a drug dealing money launderer.

So you think elderly ladies should be treated differently to other customers, I take it?

I do, actually, yes.

Just so long as you know what you're suggesting is discrimination and would be illegal if enshrined in to any form of procedure...

If you're a risk, you're a risk - I don't see that being a man or woman; 27 or 77 has much to do with it. It's not a bank's job to analyse statistical likelihoods amongst certain vulnerable groups - and any attempt to do so would be self defeating if they did as you know which groups criminals would target for money muels.

friolento

Shakin_Steve said:

WillPS said:

Shakin_Steve said:

WillPS said:

They're a bank. If they deem you to be a risk then they can simply close your accounts. Rather than doing that they're putting a process in to place with the intention of allowing you to clarify/derisk yourself.

It's extremely arduous but you as a customer have an option of simply moving your banking elsewhere if you don't like it.

Yes, of course, perfectly acceptable behaviour. The banks have every right to browbeat and threaten an elderly lady when ringing out of the blue. The ombudsman will no doubt find that the bank's behaviour was perfectly reasonable, given that she perfectly fits the profile of a drug dealing money launderer.

So you think elderly ladies should be treated differently to other customers, I take it?

I do, actually, yes.

I know quite a few women and men who would be horrified if a bank treated them differently simply on the basis of their old age, and be referred to as elderly when they are a mere 72, like the lady who started this thread. I myself would certainly not appreciate it, and I would most certainly complain. Thankfully it's never happened to anyone I know.

If I had a disability that required and warranted special treatment by banks, that would be a different matter. Under no circumstances can it be assumed that old age automatically makes you disabled.

Futuristic

Not sure if mentioned but Santander now (in the last ~year) let an offshore office (hint asia) review all your confidential uploaded documents of proof etc. I no longer use them unless I have to (eg. recent 5.2% saver)

Shakin_Steve

friolento said:

Shakin_Steve said:

WillPS said:

Shakin_Steve said:

WillPS said:

They're a bank. If they deem you to be a risk then they can simply close your accounts. Rather than doing that they're putting a process in to place with the intention of allowing you to clarify/derisk yourself.

It's extremely arduous but you as a customer have an option of simply moving your banking elsewhere if you don't like it.

Yes, of course, perfectly acceptable behaviour. The banks have every right to browbeat and threaten an elderly lady when ringing out of the blue. The ombudsman will no doubt find that the bank's behaviour was perfectly reasonable, given that she perfectly fits the profile of a drug dealing money launderer.

So you think elderly ladies should be treated differently to other customers, I take it?

I do, actually, yes.

I know quite a few women and men who would be horrified if a bank treated them differently simply on the basis of their old age, and be referred to as elderly when they are a mere 72, like the lady who started this thread. I myself would certainly not appreciate it, and I would most certainly complain. Thankfully it's never happened to anyone I know.

If I had a disability that required and warranted special treatment by banks, that would be a different matter. Under no circumstances can it be assumed that old age automatically makes you disabled.

She also said "If so has any consideration been given to the elderly". But, no matter, lots of mouthpieces for the banks on here 🙂

born_again

philonthehill said:

Unfortunately the young man made the mistake of saying that we need to know who you are. I drew his attention to how many years I have banked with them and their knowledge of my passport, NI number, utility bills and ended the conversation. 

My question to you is… are they allowed to do this? If so has any consideration been given to the elderly or less capable people. I am 72 years old and a widow. Fortunately I am still able to conduct my own business affairs and am considered intelligent. However this encounter left me shaken, upset and threatened. 

I would very much appreciate your thoughts on this and if possible see that Santander change their approach to one that is less intrusive, threatening and impossible to comply with. 

I work in a bank & a good % of staff had to go through this despite the same arguments. FCA regulation of KYC.
End of the day failure to comply will lead to account closure no matter how long you have banked with them.
FOS complaint will fail.

friolento

Shakin_Steve said:

friolento said:

Shakin_Steve said:

WillPS said:

Shakin_Steve said:

WillPS said:

They're a bank. If they deem you to be a risk then they can simply close your accounts. Rather than doing that they're putting a process in to place with the intention of allowing you to clarify/derisk yourself.

It's extremely arduous but you as a customer have an option of simply moving your banking elsewhere if you don't like it.

Yes, of course, perfectly acceptable behaviour. The banks have every right to browbeat and threaten an elderly lady when ringing out of the blue. The ombudsman will no doubt find that the bank's behaviour was perfectly reasonable, given that she perfectly fits the profile of a drug dealing money launderer.

So you think elderly ladies should be treated differently to other customers, I take it?

I do, actually, yes.

I know quite a few women and men who would be horrified if a bank treated them differently simply on the basis of their old age, and be referred to as elderly when they are a mere 72, like the lady who started this thread. I myself would certainly not appreciate it, and I would most certainly complain. Thankfully it's never happened to anyone I know.

If I had a disability that required and warranted special treatment by banks, that would be a different matter. Under no circumstances can it be assumed that old age automatically makes you disabled.

She also said "If so has any consideration been given to the elderly". But, no matter, lots of mouthpieces for the banks on here 🙂

My comments stand as before. I am not a mouthpiece for any bank - I have merely said that I am one of the many people who would object to be treated differently, by a bank or by anybody else, purely on the grounds of having reached a certain age, when it comes to verifying who we are or what the source of our wealth is.

I believe it is possible to register as a vulnerable person with all banks, so if OP wants to register as a vulnerable person she would be free to do so. Not sure whether that would exempt her from KYC procedures, as this would be a loophole fraudsters would doubtlessly exploit.

I am quite happy to agree that the questions she was asked were too intrusive - but they would be intrusive regardless of the age of the person who is asked.

In case it is important, I am a septuagenarian myself. It won't surprise you that I don't consider myself elderly, and that I don't expect that a bank treats me differently because of my age. With the minor exception that I don't expect to qualify for kids and minors accounts

dealyboy

I hope @aralexiao doesn't mind this diversion

Some organisations do treat the older person with extra care if they are on their priority services list (which is used for people with all sorts of vulnerabilities).

I am registered with a few banks where a person over 60 qualifies, you are then given a priority telephone number which enables you to get straight through and get real customer service. It is worth investigating if your bank etc operates a priority services scheme.

WillPS

dealyboy said:

I hope @aralexiao doesn't mind this diversion

Some organisations do treat the older person with extra care if they are on their priority services list (which is used for people with all sorts of vulnerabilities).

I am registered with a few banks where a person over 60 qualifies, you are then given a priority telephone number which enables you to get straight through and get real customer service. It is worth investigating if your bank etc operates a priority services scheme.

Given they haven't posted since 2019 I'm not sure we need to worry about what they think.

Extra care doesn't mean they will waive KYC requirements.

born_again

friolento said:

My comments stand as before. I am not a mouthpiece for any bank - I have merely said that I am one of the many people who would object to be treated differently, by a bank or by anybody else, purely on the grounds of having reached a certain age, when it comes to verifying who we are or what the source of our wealth is.

I believe it is possible to register as a vulnerable person with all banks, so if OP wants to register as a vulnerable person she would be free to do so. Not sure whether that would exempt her from KYC procedures, as this would be a loophole fraudsters would doubtlessly exploit.

I am quite happy to agree that the questions she was asked were too intrusive - but they would be intrusive regardless of the age of the person who is asked.

In case it is important, I am a septuagenarian myself. It won't surprise you that I don't consider myself elderly, and that I don't expect that a bank treats me differently because of my age. With the minor exception that I don't expect to qualify for kids and minors accounts

No being a vulnerable person will not exempt you from KYC questions. It may highlight that they need this info.

dealyboy

@WillPS said:

dealyboy said:

I hope @aralexiao doesn't mind this diversion

Some organisations do treat the older person with extra care if they are on their priority services list (which is used for people with all sorts of vulnerabilities).

I am registered with a few banks where a person over 60 qualifies, you are then given a priority telephone number which enables you to get straight through and get real customer service. It is worth investigating if your bank etc operates a priority services scheme.

Given they haven't posted since 2019 I'm not sure we need to worry about what they think. Just being courteous 

Extra care doesn't mean they will waive KYC requirements. Well they will want to confirm your identity which is standard practice, as if you were logging in, but after that they will treat you as if you're royalty, at least that's my experience. In the case of Halifax and Lloyds they have issued me with a 6-digit security number.

Thanks Will ... Comments answered in bold.