A major bank has been refusing to let me withdraw £10k of family savings for over one month

Terry_Towelling

Terry_Towelling wrote: »

Can you tell us which bank it is, OP?

Terry_Towelling wrote: »

You wouldn't answer my last question (I don't understand why) so how about these questions. When was the last time you paid into the account, how much did you pay in, and did this pay-in come from your usual source?

Can you possibly answer at least some of these questions (I know you've oddly opted not to answer the first one) or we will have no idea how to tell you if what has happened could be down to one thing or another.

If all of your other banking arrangements are unscathed and you haven't tried to take anything out of the account, then (notwithstanding the possibility you've been incorrectly entered onto some register or other - as mentioned by another poster) the implication is that something you've paid in has triggered a process. If you won't tell us about your pay-ins, we are all just wissing in the pind.

muhandis

Indeed! The very first response to the OP on this thread was exactly of this nature. I reported it as a breach of MSE Forum rules and it has now been taken down.

It goes against everything MSE stands for and discourages vulnerable consumers from seeking help. No one likes being treated that way.

I would encourage fellow users to make use of the report function to flag the more egregious examples of such behaviour.

snowqueen555 wrote: »

I have noticed a from recent threads of frozen accounts that the first insinuation is that the OP is suspicious. I don't think that line of tone is particularly nice or helpful!

BelowTheLine

I had no idea there were rules like that written down or how the report function works. That is really good to know!

muhandis wrote: »

I would encourage fellow users to make use of the report function to flag the more egregious examples of such behaviour.

polymaff

muhandis wrote: »

Indeed! The very first response to the OP on this thread was exactly of this nature. I reported it as a breach of MSE Forum rules and it has now been taken down.

Everyone should follow that paragraph - including the OP.

Particularly the OP, when it comes to "the prime aim is to provide info". This is equally applicable to both questioners and answerers. I recently pointed out how not providing info/data limits the quality of the answers given. It is also discourteous, as the expertise shown on this site relies upon cases and experiences posted. This thread, so far, contributes next to nothing to that shared pool.

Andysandy

Well done :T :money:

I never cease to be amazed by the completely unwarranted vitriol sometimes visible on these kind of threads.

muhandis wrote: »

Indeed! The very first response to the OP on this thread was exactly of this nature. I reported it as a breach of MSE Forum rules and it has now been taken down.

eskbanker

These threads usually elicit polarised responses!

One style is:
Bank X are a disgrace.
This is disgusting.
Go to the FCA/BBC/Daily Mail/etc.
Expose their evil/incompetence/malice/corruption.

Whereas the other is:
They don't do this for fun.
There will be a reason this has been triggered.
If you share more info we can help pinpoint likely root cause.
Have you considered x, y and z as possibilities?

Unfortunately those who are anticipating the first style of response often take exception to the second, which is admittedly sometimes framed in a way that isn't as sympathetic as it could be towards a newbie, but that doesn't actually make it unhelpful as such, in terms of identifying causes and how to avoid them in future....

Retired_Mortgage_Adviser

You have exaggerrated one side of the argument, based on where your sympathies lie, which is fair enough. But it is equally applicable the other way round too

eskbanker wrote: »

These threads usually elicit polarised responses!

One style is:
Bank X are a disgrace.
This is disgusting.
Go to the FCA/BBC/Daily Mail/etc.
Expose their evil/incompetence/malice/corruption.

Whereas the other is:
They don't do this for fun.
There will be a reason this has been triggered.
If you share more info we can help pinpoint likely root cause.
Have you considered x, y and z as possibilities?

Unfortunately those who are anticipating the first style of response often take exception to the second, which is admittedly sometimes framed in a way that isn't as sympathetic as it could be towards a newbie, but that doesn't actually make it unhelpful as such, in terms of identifying causes and how to avoid them in future....

Andysandy

Well, you are not entirely wrong but there is a difference between this -

eskbanker wrote: »

Whereas the other is:
They don't do this for fun.
There will be a reason this has been triggered.
If you share more info we can help pinpoint likely root cause.
Have you considered x, y and z as possibilities?

and insinuating/accusing a poster of lying for no/little reason.

I doubt the forum mods would take down a post which expressed what you have said in a decent manner.

eskbanker

Retired_Mortgage_Adviser wrote: »

You have exaggerrated one side of the argument, based on where your sympathies lie, which is fair enough. But it is equally applicable the other way round too

Yes, I wasn't making any attempt to conceal my opinion!

I take your point but don't see it as equally applicable both ways - my issue is that the arm-round-the-shoulder Mumsnet approach is essentially useless, in that a kneejerk emotive reaction doesn't really move anybody any further forward, whereas looking for facts is more likely to help identify constructive actions.

eskbanker

Andysandy wrote: »

Well, you are not entirely wrong but there is a difference between this -

and insinuating/accusing a poster of lying for no/little reason.

I doubt the forum mods would take down a post which expressed what you have said in a decent manner.

Yes, agreed that if someone crosses the line then that will be in breach of the forum rules and policies and will be treated accordingly, but I still can't say I've seen much evidence of 'vitriol' as such, although don't recall what was said in the post that was deleted (or indeed if I ever actually saw it!).