HSBC has frozen all my accounts - high earner left penniless

dealyboy

ent_moot said:

Okay, I have news:

• My accounts were unfrozen this morning (a little over a week after they were frozen)! 
• I visited my local branch. The chap there did his best to investigate; however, the usual leads (where departments are required to leave a memo when an account has been inhibited) were left blank. He said there are two departments that are not required to leave such a memo: the fraud department, and the regulatory department. He said that it was more likely to be the latter, as "statutory UK regulatory requirement" (or whatever the original note was) seemed to hint in this direction
• He seemed to think it was unlikely a result of paying for the kittens
• He couldn't see anything unusual about my account
• He said I'm likely to get compensation, but no explanation.

It looks like !!!!!!-up. or a faulty system. I don't have high hopes for the complaint leading to genuine explanation.

... Great news , albeit unsatisfactory.

Compensation is important ... it's not the monetary value is it ?

Thank you for the pictures.

Shakin_Steve

I'm glad you now have access to your money. Whether you choose to ditch HSBC or not is entirely your decision, but please don't expect a full explanation of events. You are one of hundreds, nay, thousands of people that go through this every year, and the advice on here is usually/always 'let it go'. 

Also, don't think that you've had your turn and it won't happen again. It just might, so make sure you are better prepared next time, and be assured that, if you've done nothing wrong, it will likely end the same way.
The one thing I would chase is compensation for any financial loss due to non payment of direct debits.

Grumpy_chap

ent_moot said:

• My accounts were unfrozen this morning (a little over a week after they were frozen)! 
• He said I'm likely to get compensation, but no explanation.

It is good that this is now resolved and thank you for updating the status.

Having the necessary investigations completed in a week or so is quite quick based upon the other similar threads that have appeared in the past in these forums.  Great that the bank was working so efficiently.

I can't understand why any compensation would be in order given that the bank have merely been fulfilling their statutory obligations.

Momanns

ent_moot said:

Okay, I have news:

• My accounts were unfrozen this morning (a little over a week after they were frozen)! 
• I visited my local branch. The chap there did his best to investigate; however, the usual leads (where departments are required to leave a memo when an account has been inhibited) were left blank. He said there are two departments that are not required to leave such a memo: the fraud department, and the regulatory department. He said that it was more likely to be the latter, as "statutory UK regulatory requirement" (or whatever the original note was) seemed to hint in this direction
• He seemed to think it was unlikely a result of paying for the kittens
• He couldn't see anything unusual about my account
• He said I'm likely to get compensation, but no explanation.

It looks like !!!!!!-up. or a faulty system. I don't have high hopes for the complaint leading to genuine explanation.

• He said I'm likely to get compensation, but no explanation. - Is he funding this himself?

As others have said, you are unlikely to get compensation or an explanation. However, if events truly are you have described then you do have the option to complain & escalate and even take to the Ombudsman but will still probably only get a "statutory requirement" type response. 

Could you check with the people who sold the cats? They might have had a similar issue which might explain things slightly. In 17+ years I have never heard of an account being blocked for a week due to a £1,000 transfer so it may forever be a mystery. 

General_Grant

Momanns said:

AstonSmith said:

k_man said:

I imagine that multiple incoming payments of many hundreds of pounds from different sending accounts would trigger AML alarm bells at the kitten seller's bank.
This then has a potential knock on to all those sending accounts, yours included.

I reckon you're 100% spot on. If the kitten sellers were suddenly and unusually receiving £1000s, that'll trip a flag somewhere. Then like a contagion, reports are sent to the banks of all those sales who then freeze accounts. That bit might even be automated.

I strongly believe that the law as currently implemented harms normal people more than criminals. Even if the OP doesn't receive much of an explanation from their MP about why this happened, perhaps it'll nudge them to change the legislation a bit.

Reaction to frozen accounts depending on group:

• Innocent: what happened? I can't pay my bills
• Organised crime: the account's frozen, they've cottoned on, time to move
  

100% Doesn't happen like that. Might create an alert with the seller's account but there is no report sent to the payee banks. Even then, the alert would only trigger a potential investigation with the sellers account. No automated account block. 

Again, the entire banking system would collapse if accounts that received or sent multiple payments were suddenly blocked.

Agree with many of the posts, the system is broken as it is overwhelmed and under resourced. 

Organised Crime - If the account is subject to a fraud/AML block then the funds would not be transferable through switch or moving accounts. 

Law enforcement do freeze/forfeit money held in accounts but are just as overwhelmed/under resourced. 

?
In this case isn't the seller's account with the payee bank?

RG2015

I believe that there should be compensation for the unpaid direct debits if nothing else.

MrFrugalFever

RG2015 said:

I believe that there should be compensation for the unpaid direct debits if nothing else.

I’d be more concerned about the negative markers this will inevitably leave on the CRA’s files and therefore I would be seeking redress as far as a ‘clean’ credit report is concerned, as opposed to monetary compensation.

cymruchris

Good to see you've got your access back. You've no doubt learnt a thing or two from the whole experience (and I can understand it wasn't pleasant).

I'm sure you will, but definitely keep your funds across at least two bank accounts from different banking group families, don't have all your eggs in one basket.

Additionally as has been pointed out, your experience could have happened with any bank - it's likely HSBC were following the rules as any other bank would have done. I'm not sure there's any point in 'closing the account under protest', but I'm sure you'll make a balanced, informed decision accordingly.

born_again

Nice kittens.

What the poster meant was check the credit report to see if anything unusual is showing. Such as new accounts you have not opened.
Not the score, which means nothing to anyone other than the companies that create them. Banks never see them.

RG2015

MrFrugalFever said:

RG2015 said:

I believe that there should be compensation for the unpaid direct debits if nothing else.

I’d be more concerned about the negative markers this will inevitably leave on the CRA’s files and therefore I would be seeking redress as far as a ‘clean’ credit report is concerned, as opposed to monetary compensation.

Wouldn’t any negative CRA markers be solely as a result of the unpaid direct debits?