Nat West Bank account closed for putting someone else’s money into it

Ed-1

General_Grant said:

Ed-1 said:

General_Grant said:

Ed-1 said:

eskbanker said:

Ed-1 said:

eskbanker said:

HobgoblinBT said:

If any electronic payments were received eg universal credit, the payees name would have been mismatched to the account holder’s name, which could have led to the review that resulted in the account closure.

Are you suggesting that recipients of electronic payments have visibility of the payee name used by the sender?  I don't know if UC payments include the beneficiary's name within the payment reference field, but that's the only way I believe that any such discrepancy would be apparent....

The bank can see the beneficiary name on electronic payments.

'Beneficiary' in the sense of the person entitled to UC or the payee name used for the transfer?  In other words, if DWP are (knowingly) sending a payment intended for Person A to an account in the name of Person B, will the receiving bank have sufficient data to spot that anomaly?

The beneficiary in terms of the person claiming universal credit. The bank can see that and see that it doeDosn't match the account holder's name. That's no problem in itself although the bank may suspect something fraudulent may be going on.

I think it more likely that the bank can see the NINo rather than a name if the payment has been properly sent by DWP.
Do you have experience of seeing a name as well as the NINo?

The bank can see the name on the payment 'behind the scenes'.

What appears if the DWP knowingly send a payment to Ann Brown's account when the entitled person is Carol Dare?

The name on the payment has to be the beneficiary to benefits, not the account name.

brianposter

Formal complaint seems to be the obvious first step, if it has not already been made.

[Deleted User]

Sounds like a storm in a teacup as if NatWest were her only/main bankers.

Probably a NatWest T&C breach rather than one eligible for a CIFAS marker.

Other banking fish in the sea with Ulster/ RBS are her only other likely losses.

kaMelo

People having their benefits paid into someone else's bank account is not a problem that would cause a bank account to be closed, it's actually more common than you may think although usually there is some connection beyond friendship between the two parties. Given that everyone has access to at least a basic bank account it's hard to understand why they choose not to have one but, it is what it is.
 I certainly cannot see anything written in the terms for any bank to suggest doing this is a problem, it's certainly not uncommon for benefit payments so I would suggest it's something else.  If they're not forthcoming then she needs to raise a formal complaint and see what turns up.

P.S.
NEVER call Universal Credit for benefit advice, they are simply administrators not advisors. If you want benefit advice approach someone trained to give it such as CAB.

seatbeltnoob

Chris_English said:

Paying money into someone else's account is not a problem at all. There's no way that the bank would have any idea whose money it is, as money doesn't come with any owner identified, so there must be something more that's gone on here than you've mentioned so far.

Were you given access to the account, or were you allowed to spend money directly from it? Did you perhaps have your wages paid in, and then transferred out, regularly? Any of these could be a breach of the terms and conditions of the account.

sure you know that bank transfers have an account name, sort code and account number? course they'll know.

they have been really clamping down on these over recent years, they stopped 3rd party cash deposits when I tried to pay some money into my mums bank account a few years ago.

seatbeltnoob

Chris_English said:

james72 said:

Chris_English said:

Paying money into someone else's account is not a problem at all. There's no way that the bank would have any idea whose money it is, as money doesn't come with any owner identified, so there must be something more that's gone on here than you've mentioned so far.

Were you given access to the account, or were you allowed to spend money directly from it? Did you perhaps have your wages paid in, and then transferred out, regularly? Any of these could be a breach of the terms and conditions of the account.

No access at all

But it was UC money going in

But UC and accountant said it would be fine 

So it was withdrawn as cash and handed to you that way?

I suppose that it could still breach some banks' T&Cs, but it seems quite harsh. I have money paid into my account for my children from relatives, for their birthdays, and I'd not be happy if the bank tried to be difficult about that.

banks are very anti cash, it's a costly part of their operation. Hence why they're closing branches all over the place. Im on a business forum and someone needed to open a business bank account and they were refused because they disclosed that they need to deposit cash frequently. They want high profit customers, who just do all the banking electronically, never need a branch and never need customer services.

nyermen

The person she spoke to today suggests that she will now find it hard to open any account

Based on what has been described, a cifas/NH marker would seem unfair.  Once the account owner knows about this, they can then either complain about the marker (if there is one), or go get an account with another bank (if not).  

I think we can only speculate until then.

Thrugelmir

In cases such as this would be helpfull if the person involved posted then a fuller picture would be known.