HSBC account closure

Section62

AstonSmith said:

If it turns out that a CIFAS "misuse of facility" marker was added for using a personal account for business purposes (and I stress "if")... how is that fair?

I understand that the terms were broken, and the bank involved has every right to terminate the account, but the CIFAS marker system was intended for serious fraud. Using a personal account for minor, sole-trading business is not serious fraud.

I think the question shouldn't be about 'fair' but instead 'proportionate'.

However, "serious" is subjective.  You may feel it is a minor thing, but if you were providing a paid-for service and someone was cheating you out of what they owe you for providing that service, would you still feel the same way?  I wouldn't.  I doubt the bank's shareholders would either.  Essentially it is a form of dishonesty - and since the banking relationship relies on honesty (both ways), it isn't difficult to understand the bank's reaction if something like this happens.

k_man

Agreed.

Similar to work Vs personal use (which doesn't look to have happened here) not being fraud, selling BTC of itself it also not fraud.

Monzo appear to be very cryptocurrency friendly.

https://monzo.com/help/payments-getting-started/monzo-crypto-friendly

More details are required before what actually happened here is clear.

Ezii

The thing is I would never use my main bank account, and would always use monzo for everything, each month when I did get paid, I'd just transfer to monzo, and use it for everyday purchases and daily things. But right before my account was closed, I sold BTC for some bank transfers on P2P website, and monzo had left me a marker straight away for it, but still unsure if my selling BTC for bank transfers was the reason for the marker received from Monzo, as they haven't responded to my query, and complaint, on why they have given me the marker.

Ezii

I honestly don't get why people are bashing at me If I knew what I had done wrong I would've never made the thread. I only asked for the eBay payments, for the credit union account, and yet people here making assumptions that I used my Monzo for business which I did not. 

Ezii

I'm extremely stressed as is why this is happening, yet I've only sought out help regarding this if anyone may know, But to be bashed doesn't feel great on this whilst being under so much pressure on my bank's closing, without a warrant and unfairly, when I know I've done nothing wrong. Some of you guys haven't put me at ease at all. Only if you going through this can understand honestly people are so quick to make assumptions, instead of helping

MrFrugalFever

Ezii, first of all take a deep breath and chill for a moment. Several posters have made some perfectly valid points, especially around inaccurate information or omissions of information from the off. That being said, I believe your main question and point of the thread was to establish if you had any recourse in resolving the matter and for help in being in a situation that’s led to an immediate closure of your bank account (2 of 4).

In order for anyone to help you (and generally that’s what we are all here to do), it may be worth posting an honest timeline and summary of events which led to the CIFA’s marker point, obviously not posting personal information. It’s not entirely clear from previous posts and all a bit mish mash. That way we could potentially help, but ultimately nothing we say or do will change the here and now and that is you have a CAT6 CIFA’s for ‘allegedly’ committing a fraudulent activity or serious breach of a banks T’C’s.

Section62

sutton111 said:

An addtional avenue would be to contact a solicitor who deals with this time of circumstance. A simple Google search will help you find one, or contact CAB. Sadly, CAB is under high levels of engagement currently because of the cost of living, so there would likely be a delay.

How would a solicitor be able to help in a situation like this?

The terms and conditions of bank accounts allow the bank to terminate the arragement - with or without notice depending on the circumstances. You can't sue a bank to make them reopen a closed account.

If the CIFAS marker has been added incorrectly then the best approach is to follow the (free) complaints process.  A solicitor will just charge money to tell you to do this, or to write a letter or two.

No point in the OP spending time and money chasing a dead end.

grumbler

Section62 said:

sutton111 said:

An addtional avenue would be to contact a solicitor who deals with this time of circumstance. A simple Google search will help you find one, or contact CAB. Sadly, CAB is under high levels of engagement currently because of the cost of living, so there would likely be a delay.

How would a solicitor be able to help in a situation like this?

The terms and conditions of bank accounts allow the bank to terminate the arragement - with or without notice depending on the circumstances. You can't sue a bank to make them reopen a closed account.

If the CIFAS marker has been added incorrectly then the best approach is to follow the (free) complaints process.  A solicitor will just charge money to tell you to do this, or to write a letter or two.

No point in the OP spending time and money chasing a dead end.

Well, I am no expert and don't advocate doing this, but I can imagine suing the bank for defamation of character or similar. The bank reported the customer to a FRAUD prevention agency and made this information public. I am pretty sure that there is a clear legal definition of fraud that this and other banks chose to ignore.

Section62

grumbler said:

Well, I am no expert and don't advocate doing this, but I can imagine suing the bank for defamation of character or similar. The bank reported the customer to a FRAUD prevention agency and made this information public. I am pretty sure that there is a clear legal definition of fraud that this and other banks chose to ignore.

Has the information been made "public"?  How did that happen?

Does the information itself, and the way it has been used, constitute defamation?

We can probably figure this out without the OP needing to pay a solicitor to do it for them.

grumbler

Section62 said:

grumbler said:

Well, I am no expert and don't advocate doing this, but I can imagine suing the bank for defamation of character or similar. The bank reported the customer to a FRAUD prevention agency and made this information public. I am pretty sure that there is a clear legal definition of fraud that this and other banks chose to ignore.

Has the information been made "public"?  How did that happen?

Published at the agency to which countless other institutions have access to.

Again, I am no expert and don't know the legal definition of 'public'

Does the information itself, and the way it has been used, constitute defamation?

If it's reported to a FRAUD prevention agency, then the only way I can interpret 'misuse' is 'fraudulent misuse' or 'misuse for committing fraud'

It was used by another institution and allegedly resulted in the account closure.