Gifted deposit from USA?

Windofchange

I would concur with davidmcn's view that if it has been in your account long enough it is highly unlikely to get scrutinised. We had a similar sum  moved between our main accounts about a year before buying our house last year. Our solicitor wanted 3 months bank statements from us to satisfy the mortgage lender. Didn't ask for anything from before then, so the first statement we had to show had a near six figure sum sat in it and no questions asked about the origin / can you give me statements from the last year etc. 

From what I read at the time, from a legal point of view it is about satisfying yourself that the funds are genuine. How far are you going to go back to do that? If someone had been saving a deposit for 10 years are you going to ask them for 10 years worth of pay slips to prove that the 75k has come from salary? The deposit is only a part of the picture they build of you as a client, and for us at least, the money laundering checks were over and done with in a single e-mail. 

Thrugelmir

davidmcn said:

Thrugelmir said:

davidmcn said:

Thrugelmir said:

Mark_1986 said:

K_S said:
Generally speaking, the longer it's been sitting in your account in the UK, the less likely t uit is to be subject to onerous checks.

Bthan the solicitor simply seeing a few bank statements. 

Hmm, I wouldn't go that far. After all, what is the original source of any funds? You have to draw the line somewhere!

Be little point in having money laundering regulations if people could simply transfer £100k sums around at will around the globe.  Easy enough to find money mules. 

but less likely that any "mule" would be trusted with £100k for over 6 months...

All the money has to arrive in the UK first. 

MaryNB

davidmcn said:

Thrugelmir said:

Mark_1986 said:

K_S said:
Generally speaking, the longer it's been sitting in your account in the UK, the less likely it is to be subject to onerous checks.

Do banks and solicitors normally ask for 3 or 6 months of statements when it comes to proof of funds/deposit? 

For a £100k expect to have to provide definitive original source of the funds. Money laundering checks are far more detailed than the solicitor simply seeing a few bank statements. 

Hmm, I wouldn't go that far. After all, what is the original source of any funds? You have to draw the line somewhere!

Generally people will take the view that money-laundering is a fast-moving activity, and if money has been in your (and/or the gifter's) account for long enough then it probably doesn't secretly belong to a third party.

My conveyancing solicitor didn't take this view.

My father (in Ireland) gifted me money at the end of last year. He provided evidence showing it had been in invested in an Irish state savings fund since 2013. My solicitor still asked for further proof of the source. He had to get a letter from his former employer showing his was a lump sum payout after he retired in 2013.

tetrarch

Having done a recent transaction with multiple gifts, an offset drawdown, investment and ISA sales and mutiple single and joint accounts the requirements on the conveyancer were limited to 6 months in every single case.

I would suggest getting the cash into an account under your control soonest.

Regards

Tet

PS - Our biggest single problem was loan from my MIL. She has no passport or driving licence and the only acceptable way to get ID confirmed was via the GP. This was too onerous, so we gave up and those funds ultimately weren't included in the transferred amount. 

davidmcn

MaryNB said:

davidmcn said:

Thrugelmir said:

Mark_1986 said:

K_S said:
Generally speaking, the longer it's been sitting in your account in the UK, the less likely it is to be subject to onerous checks.

Do banks and solicitors normally ask for 3 or 6 months of statements when it comes to proof of funds/deposit? 

For a £100k expect to have to provide definitive original source of the funds. Money laundering checks are far more detailed than the solicitor simply seeing a few bank statements. 

Hmm, I wouldn't go that far. After all, what is the original source of any funds? You have to draw the line somewhere!

Generally people will take the view that money-laundering is a fast-moving activity, and if money has been in your (and/or the gifter's) account for long enough then it probably doesn't secretly belong to a third party.

My conveyancing solicitor didn't take this view.

My father (in Ireland) gifted me money at the end of last year. He provided evidence showing it had been in invested in an Irish state savings fund since 2013. My solicitor still asked for further proof of the source. He had to get a letter from his former employer showing his was a lump sum payout after he retired in 2013.

That's pretty absurd. We had somebody else here who had problems with a similar request, as their old employer simply didn't exist any more. Not sure whether their solicitor would have regarded their money as always "suspect", no matter how long they had it.

hippocrates1

MaryNB said:

davidmcn said:

Thrugelmir said:

Mark_1986 said:

K_S said:
Generally speaking, the longer it's been sitting in your account in the UK, the less likely it is to be subject to onerous checks.

Do banks and solicitors normally ask for 3 or 6 months of statements when it comes to proof of funds/deposit? 

For a £100k expect to have to provide definitive original source of the funds. Money laundering checks are far more detailed than the solicitor simply seeing a few bank statements. 

Hmm, I wouldn't go that far. After all, what is the original source of any funds? You have to draw the line somewhere!

Generally people will take the view that money-laundering is a fast-moving activity, and if money has been in your (and/or the gifter's) account for long enough then it probably doesn't secretly belong to a third party.

My conveyancing solicitor didn't take this view.

My father (in Ireland) gifted me money at the end of last year. He provided evidence showing it had been in invested in an Irish state savings fund since 2013. My solicitor still asked for further proof of the source. He had to get a letter from his former employer showing his was a lump sum payout after he retired in 2013.

Not sure father and great aunt are comparable 

MaryNB

hippocrates1 said:

MaryNB said:

davidmcn said:

Thrugelmir said:

Mark_1986 said:

K_S said:
Generally speaking, the longer it's been sitting in your account in the UK, the less likely it is to be subject to onerous checks.

Do banks and solicitors normally ask for 3 or 6 months of statements when it comes to proof of funds/deposit? 

For a £100k expect to have to provide definitive original source of the funds. Money laundering checks are far more detailed than the solicitor simply seeing a few bank statements. 

Hmm, I wouldn't go that far. After all, what is the original source of any funds? You have to draw the line somewhere!

Generally people will take the view that money-laundering is a fast-moving activity, and if money has been in your (and/or the gifter's) account for long enough then it probably doesn't secretly belong to a third party.

My conveyancing solicitor didn't take this view.

My father (in Ireland) gifted me money at the end of last year. He provided evidence showing it had been in invested in an Irish state savings fund since 2013. My solicitor still asked for further proof of the source. He had to get a letter from his former employer showing his was a lump sum payout after he retired in 2013.

Not sure father and great aunt are comparable 

It was a response to a comment about the length of time funds were in an account (the part of davidmcn's comment I highlighted), not the relationship with the person providing the gifted deposit.

MaryNB

davidmcn said:

MaryNB said:

davidmcn said:

Thrugelmir said:

Mark_1986 said:

K_S said:
Generally speaking, the longer it's been sitting in your account in the UK, the less likely it is to be subject to onerous checks.

Do banks and solicitors normally ask for 3 or 6 months of statements when it comes to proof of funds/deposit? 

For a £100k expect to have to provide definitive original source of the funds. Money laundering checks are far more detailed than the solicitor simply seeing a few bank statements. 

Hmm, I wouldn't go that far. After all, what is the original source of any funds? You have to draw the line somewhere!

Generally people will take the view that money-laundering is a fast-moving activity, and if money has been in your (and/or the gifter's) account for long enough then it probably doesn't secretly belong to a third party.

My conveyancing solicitor didn't take this view.

My father (in Ireland) gifted me money at the end of last year. He provided evidence showing it had been in invested in an Irish state savings fund since 2013. My solicitor still asked for further proof of the source. He had to get a letter from his former employer showing his was a lump sum payout after he retired in 2013.

That's pretty absurd. We had somebody else here who had problems with a similar request, as their old employer simply didn't exist any more. Not sure whether their solicitor would have regarded their money as always "suspect", no matter how long they had it.

It was a nightmare. My father is man of cash and so has no online accounts and my solicitor said copies of his docs had to be posted over (during hard lockdown and he should have been shielding) not scanned and emailed. I'm stunned and very lucky he got a letter so quickly from the council (former employer) during lockdown. 

Mark_1986

I'm thinking of selling my car (£16k approx.) to increase my deposit.
Should I ask the buyer to pay by bank transfer or cheque rather than cash? If I do take cash payment, is the solicitor going to question it? 

davidmcn

Mark_1986 said:

I'm thinking of selling my car (£16k approx.) to increase my deposit.
Should I ask the buyer to pay by bank transfer or cheque rather than cash? If I do take cash payment, is the solicitor going to question it? 

Yes, £16k in cash is only likely to ring alarm bells.