Safest way to withdraw large sum of cash in respect of AML precautions

Sea_Shell

BooJewels said:

Deleted User said:

If you can't get her bank details, I'd get her a cashier/counter cheque (free or around £10) and tell her she has six months to bank it. This has the advantage that the funds are debited at the point of issue - one and done. 

I'll look into it, but I suspect that it might just be an additional step that doesn't gain me any advantage and part of me also thinks it's another potential risk.

Well, the money would have left your account.  So no need to wonder if and when a personal cheque was going to (ever) be banked.

Have it sent recorded delivery, with a covering letter, keep copies.

You can then wash your hands of the situation, as there is then no chance of waters being muddied by you having the uncashed funds in your account still.

Job done!

BooJewels

@xylophone - presumably you've looked at my posting history, so you're again asking a question you already know the answer to - not sure why you have to post it in bold though. 

As of today, I believe that I do, as I haven't yet had it confirmed to the contrary (it was still live on 5/11 when the OPG did a search for me).  But I hope that won't be the case for much longer.  Although as of now, I'm not actually claiming that authority to do anything with it.

BooJewels

Ah thanks @Sea_Shell - I hadn't thought of it that way - which I can see has some advantages.  But I still need to visit the bank and explain myself, so that's why I felt there was still an element of risk for me involved.  Or does the counter cheque/bankers draft going to a named person eliminate the AML aspect of it?

Sea_Shell

If you haven't already, Google your bank and bankers draft and see what their T&C's say.

I don't know whether you'll be interrogated, as to the whys and wherefores.

Also, does the account holding the money currently have this facility?  As you said a note had already been placed on it as to "ownership" of funds.

It would be best if a draft could be raised on that account, rather than transfer it to another of your accounts first.

xylophone

As I'm sure you're already aware, absolutely none. 

I  wasn't aware or I wouldn't have asked.

- presumably you've looked at my posting history, so you're again asking a question you already know the answer to - not sure why you have to post it in bold though. 

No, I hadn't (although I often do).

As for the bold,  I use it where I judge it to be important.

BooJewels

Sea_Shell said:

If you haven't already, Google your bank and bankers draft and see what their T&C's say.

I don't know whether you'll be interrogated, as to the whys and wherefores.

Also, does the account holding the money currently have this facility?  As you said a note had already been placed on it as to "ownership" of funds.

It would be best if a draft could be raised on that account, rather than transfer it to another of your accounts first.

I have been trying to find details - the answers are ambiguous - on a general search it states - in respect of savings accounts: in branch you can withdraw "up to £250,000 by counter cheque, subject to account conditions" - but the 'account conditions' document itself doesn't mention it specifically (other than I can operate the account in branch), but presumably it means any withdrawal limits for the type of account - or perhaps just the balance of the account.  I'm not really any the wiser just yet.  I'll log in to the account and see if there's any more details there.

As already mentioned, I don't even know if a note was made on the account or not - we were sat in an office and she was working away at a computer on the desk.  I was merely trying to demonstrate that I'd tried to behave responsibly at the time - but I'm being made to feel a right chump now.  It was one of a number of important things we did that day - like pay off our mortgage.

BooJewels

xylophone said:

As I'm sure you're already aware, absolutely none. 

I  wasn't aware or I wouldn't have asked.

- presumably you've looked at my posting history, so you're again asking a question you already know the answer to - not sure why you have to post it in bold though. 

No, I hadn't (although I often do).

As for the bold,  I use it where I judge it to be important.

I'm not sure how I could possibly have any 'evidence' that a bank employee did anything specific of that nature.  We described the situation to her, she was working away on the computer and she gave us a receipt.  

So, why do you feel the LPA is important in this particular situation?  I'm not operating under its authority in this instance - nor claiming to - wasn't really at the time, but as a courtesy we showed the bank employee that we had that status - because we were talking about our accounts, not using the LPA to access the Donor's.  

[Deleted User]

I'd just concentrate on getting rid of the funds in a safe and traceable manner. 

Get the counter cheque, hand it over in person and wash your hands. You'll have an independent record that it's debited your account and payable only to that name. 

Unfortunately, given family experience of something loosely similar - there is no bulletproof way to distance yourself completely. 

BooJewels

Thanks @Deleted User  - this is a no win situation.  The are two aspects of it that are causing me distress - firstly, that I made promises to my husband in his last days, that I won't - through no fault of my own - be able to keep.   That's the really tough one. Secondly, the indecent haste with which I ceased to be a trusted family member.  I knew that it would happen, I just didn't expect it to be quite so fast.  

xylophone

I'm not sure how I could possibly have any 'evidence' that a bank employee did anything specific of that nature.

You said

We paid the initial amount of cash in at that appointment and asked for a note to be put on the account that it wasn't our money and we were holding it in trust for this family member and we would be adding to it over time and we showed them the LPA documents - 

I asked what evidence you had of the above.

With regard to the LPA, a relative held this for his relative and was able to open accounts in her sole name but with him as Attorney - in this way there was no doubt about who owned the money or about his authority to administer the account on the relative's behalf.