Lloyds close my account without any reason, can I reopen the account after few years?

xlnc99

Ed-1 said:

xlnc99 said:

eskbanker said:

xlnc99 said:

Too many people on this forum who have no idea what they are talking about and think they are experts talking about 'money laundering' when depositing 1k in cash or 'moving money' around to other accounts. 

Seriously? Why .... just why?

Gold help us

Obviously nobody on here knows why Lloyds are closing OP's account, so the only place OP could get that information would be Lloyds themselves, and they're unlikely to divulge anything in meaningful detail.

So, in the absence of knowing the definitive reason, people are offering suggestions as to what may have triggered this - inevitably this entails a certain degree of speculation (some informed, some less so) but the only realistic alternative would be to say to OP 'nobody on here knows, ask the bank'.  Granted, OP didn't actually ask why their account was closed but the subject of the (un)likelihood of future business is clearly entwined with the root cause, and there's obviously little point in OP moving to another bank and repeating the same pattern of activity, only to encounter the same response.

However, the words 'money laundering' are often emotive, in that many, perhaps including yourself, don't seem to appreciate the difference between acting in such a way as to trigger checks put in place to satisfy anti money laundering legislation versus actually being accused of money-laundering....

Why do you believe OP is having their account closed?

Whenever one of these famous threads come on the forum (i am talking about the 'bank has closed down account thread' and as sure as night and day these threads will forever come on here until the end of time) - the first responses people give us 'money laundering'. Its just laughable really. Most (not all) dont have a clue what it is, but seem to be experts on money laundering.

I have no idea why the bank have shut his account but my based on the OP points money laundering would not be on the top list. 1k cash deposits wont trigger anything. Moving money from accounts to accounts - everyone does it. Furthermore, the bank gave 65 days to close the account which is over 2 months. If it was something serious or something illegal then he would not be given 65 days - u should know this, you come across quite smart.

We should also bear in the mind the OP most likely hasnt told us the full details (no blame on him), maybe due to shame or personal reasons. Rarely you see people come on here and admit everything to a tee. 

My only guess is, it could be something to do with him being an international student and quite possibly brexit. The date of closure 2 months is exactly Jan 1 2021 - (i maybe wrong but isnt there some new rules from Jan 2021)???? Again this is pure speculation. For the bank to give 65 days notice and also say to the customer 'we will not accept your applications in the future' leads me to believe that he did not get 65 days notice, and more like 7 days notice but hasnt told us the full story. Most likely did something wrong, fraud, scam etc. He just told us 65 days to paint a picture of himself not looking dodgy. 

It does not make sense for the OP to do something very wrong for the bank to say will not accept you in the future then give them a further 2 months of access to the bank account. 7 days would be most.

Thus will be the letter OP got:

Natwest also ban you from future applications even if they give 60 days notice of closure.

This does have logic: If they're making a commercial decision to reject your business based on your history with them, why would they accept it in future?

Interesting, I am surprised they have given him so long (65 days) but at the same time saying we dont want you in the future. Closing the account is one thing but to say don't apply again means he must have done something to pee them off. i can only conclude that

1 - LLoyds dont want him (although if that was the case its harsh for them to say basically dont apply in the future) as circumstances may change later on
2 - The OP has been misusing the account in a way which LLoyds do not like, or maybe not using it in a way LLoyds prefer
3 - The OP has crossed some 'grey areas' which his account but nothing deemed too dangerous i.e fraud, money laundering otherwise they would not give him 65 days notice
4 - Something to do with his international status and brexit rule change from Jan 2021.

dunstonh

jonesMUFCforever said:

dunstonh said:

Banks will also periodically look at unprofitable accounts.   Salary in and almost immediately paid out to another bank is one of the types they target.   Its not always about activity in a suspicious way but in a commercial way.

I have to admit it is very rare for me to disagree with you - your posts are always spot on - but in this case I have to.
Accounts as you suggest above may not be profitable per se but give the bank marketing leverage that they would not have if they were not a customer for such things as mortgages, Home insurance, Life insurance, Pensions, Loans , Credit cards etc etc.
If you believe HSBC from their figures last week when they were suggesting that they MAY charge for current accounts in the future - then most current accounts are unprofitable for a bank.

I admit my direct banking knowledge is weakened by the number of years I have been out of banking but back in my day we would periodically close unprofitable accounts.   
Marketing leverage was also considered.  There was a profitability marker for each account which took product purchases into account. It included insurance, investments, pensions, credit card etc.     Only accounts with no "products" purchased and sufficient history with the bank to have at least given that a possibility would be considered.    
Nearly always it is the money in from payroll one day and money out the next style account with no real transactions in between.

With the banks suffering an all time low net-interest margin, profitability is back in the news, as you say.  So a haircut of the least profitable accounts with little or no marketing potential would not be a surprise.

NottinghamKnight

It surprises me that the banks aren't more commercially minded in relation to unprofitable accounts, I do my utmost to gain as much as i reasonably can from my interaction with many banks, especially current accounts, and have never had an issue; if I were the bank I'd get rid of me pretty quickly but they don't seem to.

dkdhbo2

@bradders1983
no.... i mean what behaviour seems "risk" ....

dkdhbo2

@elsien
Many thanks !! I got that.

bradders1983

dkdhbo2 said:

@bradders1983
no.... i mean what behaviour seems "risk" ....

Fair enough, but this whole thread is a bit bizarre.  Its like someone pining for their ex. Just let it go and start an account with another bank.

dkdhbo2

@Tragen
haha yes, I should move on.. thank you.

ratechaser

dunstonh said:

jonesMUFCforever said:

dunstonh said:

Banks will also periodically look at unprofitable accounts.   Salary in and almost immediately paid out to another bank is one of the types they target.   Its not always about activity in a suspicious way but in a commercial way.

I have to admit it is very rare for me to disagree with you - your posts are always spot on - but in this case I have to.
Accounts as you suggest above may not be profitable per se but give the bank marketing leverage that they would not have if they were not a customer for such things as mortgages, Home insurance, Life insurance, Pensions, Loans , Credit cards etc etc.
If you believe HSBC from their figures last week when they were suggesting that they MAY charge for current accounts in the future - then most current accounts are unprofitable for a bank.

I admit my direct banking knowledge is weakened by the number of years I have been out of banking but back in my day we would periodically close unprofitable accounts.   
Marketing leverage was also considered.  There was a profitability marker for each account which took product purchases into account. It included insurance, investments, pensions, credit card etc.     Only accounts with no "products" purchased and sufficient history with the bank to have at least given that a possibility would be considered.    
Nearly always it is the money in from payroll one day and money out the next style account with no real transactions in between.

With the banks suffering an all time low net-interest margin, profitability is back in the news, as you say.  So a haircut of the least profitable accounts with little or no marketing potential would not be a surprise.

In that case, heaven help Mrs RC and myself. The only current accounts that we have are with Natwest and Santander. Natwest has a couple of DDs and SOs, and a few large in/out transactions every month (salary in, savings out) but otherwise runs close to flat. And for that they pay us a net £8/month in rewards

Santander has just enough paid into it each month to cover all the other DDs that generate about £10/month net cashback. And that's just the tip of the (now almost melted) Santander iceberg, which has been seriously profitable for us over the past 10 years!

Plus opted out of all marketing and no chance of selling us any extra services...

So whatever premier/select status they like to pretend we have with them, we must be high up on their unprofitable hit list! 

Thrugelmir

ratechaser said:

dunstonh said:

jonesMUFCforever said:

dunstonh said:

Banks will also periodically look at unprofitable accounts.   Salary in and almost immediately paid out to another bank is one of the types they target.   Its not always about activity in a suspicious way but in a commercial way.

I have to admit it is very rare for me to disagree with you - your posts are always spot on - but in this case I have to.
Accounts as you suggest above may not be profitable per se but give the bank marketing leverage that they would not have if they were not a customer for such things as mortgages, Home insurance, Life insurance, Pensions, Loans , Credit cards etc etc.
If you believe HSBC from their figures last week when they were suggesting that they MAY charge for current accounts in the future - then most current accounts are unprofitable for a bank.

I admit my direct banking knowledge is weakened by the number of years I have been out of banking but back in my day we would periodically close unprofitable accounts.   
Marketing leverage was also considered.  There was a profitability marker for each account which took product purchases into account. It included insurance, investments, pensions, credit card etc.     Only accounts with no "products" purchased and sufficient history with the bank to have at least given that a possibility would be considered.    
Nearly always it is the money in from payroll one day and money out the next style account with no real transactions in between.

With the banks suffering an all time low net-interest margin, profitability is back in the news, as you say.  So a haircut of the least profitable accounts with little or no marketing potential would not be a surprise.

So whatever premier/select status they like to pretend we have with them, we must be high up on their unprofitable hit list! 

Doubt that customers like you are an immediate priority. 

Yahoo_Mail

xlnc99 said:

Ed-1 said:

xlnc99 said:

eskbanker said:

xlnc99 said:

Too many people on this forum who have no idea what they are talking about and think they are experts talking about 'money laundering' when depositing 1k in cash or 'moving money' around to other accounts. 

Seriously? Why .... just why?

Gold help us

Obviously nobody on here knows why Lloyds are closing OP's account, so the only place OP could get that information would be Lloyds themselves, and they're unlikely to divulge anything in meaningful detail.

So, in the absence of knowing the definitive reason, people are offering suggestions as to what may have triggered this - inevitably this entails a certain degree of speculation (some informed, some less so) but the only realistic alternative would be to say to OP 'nobody on here knows, ask the bank'.  Granted, OP didn't actually ask why their account was closed but the subject of the (un)likelihood of future business is clearly entwined with the root cause, and there's obviously little point in OP moving to another bank and repeating the same pattern of activity, only to encounter the same response.

However, the words 'money laundering' are often emotive, in that many, perhaps including yourself, don't seem to appreciate the difference between acting in such a way as to trigger checks put in place to satisfy anti money laundering legislation versus actually being accused of money-laundering....

Why do you believe OP is having their account closed?

Whenever one of these famous threads come on the forum (i am talking about the 'bank has closed down account thread' and as sure as night and day these threads will forever come on here until the end of time) - the first responses people give us 'money laundering'. Its just laughable really. Most (not all) dont have a clue what it is, but seem to be experts on money laundering.

I have no idea why the bank have shut his account but my based on the OP points money laundering would not be on the top list. 1k cash deposits wont trigger anything. Moving money from accounts to accounts - everyone does it. Furthermore, the bank gave 65 days to close the account which is over 2 months. If it was something serious or something illegal then he would not be given 65 days - u should know this, you come across quite smart.

We should also bear in the mind the OP most likely hasnt told us the full details (no blame on him), maybe due to shame or personal reasons. Rarely you see people come on here and admit everything to a tee. 

My only guess is, it could be something to do with him being an international student and quite possibly brexit. The date of closure 2 months is exactly Jan 1 2021 - (i maybe wrong but isnt there some new rules from Jan 2021)???? Again this is pure speculation. For the bank to give 65 days notice and also say to the customer 'we will not accept your applications in the future' leads me to believe that he did not get 65 days notice, and more like 7 days notice but hasnt told us the full story. Most likely did something wrong, fraud, scam etc. He just told us 65 days to paint a picture of himself not looking dodgy. 

It does not make sense for the OP to do something very wrong for the bank to say will not accept you in the future then give them a further 2 months of access to the bank account. 7 days would be most.

Thus will be the letter OP got:

Natwest also ban you from future applications even if they give 60 days notice of closure.

This does have logic: If they're making a commercial decision to reject your business based on your history with them, why would they accept it in future?

4 - Something to do with his international status and brexit rule change from Jan 2021.

You need to drop this one, even the briefest Google search will show that the only accounts being closed are those of people who currently reside in the EU (this includes UK nationals too.)  The OP's nationality is not relevant here, it's where they live that matters. Since that is the UK (at least for the time being) his account won't be closed due to the UK potentially losing passporting rights.