HSBC has frozen all my accounts - high earner left penniless

MrFrugalFever

RG2015 said:

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?

Unpaid direct debits that the OP had no control over due to the actions of HSBC, yes.

RG2015

MrFrugalFever said:

RG2015 said:

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?

Unpaid direct debits that the OP had no control over due to the actions of HSBC, yes.

Okay, it is speculation on something that may not happen, but what redress would anyone have if it did happen? Would HSBC have any responsibility, for example under the Direct Debit Guarantee?

ent_moot

>>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.

Personally, I couldn't care less about my credit score. I'm fortunate enough to be in a position where I'm very unlikely to ever need to take out a loan, and certainly won't use credit cards. As to a mortgage, I've already paid mine off, and if I ever did want to take out another mortgage to upscale, it would likely be less than 30% LTV. 

As to compensation, if it's less than £1000, then I will refuse to accept it. The day and a half of leave I took to attempt to sort it out alone was worth more than this, not to mention the stress it has created for me and my family. 

The whole thing has been disgraceful. 
 

MattMattMattUK

ent_moot said:

>>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.

Personally, I couldn't care less about my credit score. I'm fortunate enough to be in a position where I'm very unlikely to ever need to take out a loan, and certainly won't use credit cards. As to a mortgage, I've already paid mine off, and if I ever did want to take out another mortgage to upscale, it would likely be less than 30% LTV. 

As to compensation, if it's less than £1000, then I will refuse to accept it. The day and a half of leave I took to attempt to sort it out alone was worth more than this, not to mention the stress it has created for me and my family. 

The whole thing has been disgraceful.  

You will not get any compensation, the bank did what they are required to do undet legislation and their banking license. You taking a day and a half off was your choice and it makes no difference to the outcome so was pointless.

I would hardly describe AML, anti-fraud and other checks as disgraceful, sometimes these things happen, it was resolved in less than a week, your reaction seems to be hugely disproportionate.

trient

Off-topic, but I am genuinely impressed with the level of community support to this story, given the sense of entitlement that was displayed from beginning (title included) to end.

Glad this has been sorted out and hopefully the OP can now move on.

adamp87

Glad you got sorted.

and also very glad to see the picture of the kittens! I hope they enjoy a lovely home

RG2015

Make sure the kittens don’t get their assets frozen during this cold spell.

inspectorperez

Very interesting thread this which caught my eye the other day when I was browsing on the forum.

First of all delighted that the OP is now back in business as it were with HSBC albeit that his confidence might have been well and truly shaken with HSBC and the system generally following this short but daunting experience.

It does make me wonder about the amount of subjective judgement applied in these cases by the reporting Money Laundering Officer, in this case the person/ responsible within HSBC.

 I held this role within my own business for a number of years before retirement. It was not a banking business but to the best of my knowledge the appropriate legislation applies across the board to all businesses defined within the relevant Acts of Parliament.

One thing in particular I was always aware of was that the responsibilities were much more onerous on that person than any of his/her director or partner colleagues and could not be covered off with liability insurance. This certainly helps to concentrate one’s mind and it is not too difficult to envisage an over zealous officer reporting anything and everything where there was just the tiniest suspicion of an issue which needed to be reported. I know that I used to keep meticulous records of matters that I did not report with full reasons noted and explained just in case there was ever any comeback. In such instances it would have been much easier just to submit the report and let the regulators do their job of investigating.

Anyway, just an observation which I thought I would post for what it’s worth!

Section62

ent_moot said:

Personally, I couldn't care less about my credit score. I'm fortunate enough to be in a position where I'm very unlikely to ever need to take out a loan, and certainly won't use credit cards. As to a mortgage, I've already paid mine off, and if I ever did want to take out another mortgage to upscale, it would likely be less than 30% LTV. 
 

The information in your credit file (not 'score') is used for a lot more than deciding whether or not to lend money.

E.g. even if you don't want an overdraft, when you apply for a current account with a different bank they will very likely do a credit check on you, and if there is anything adverse in the records they may decline to offer you an account.

Ditto with insurers - whether or not you pay the premium up-front, or want credit to pay monthly, many insurers/brokers now seem to run credit checks to see whether you are a potential customer they want to do business with.

Your cerdit score isn't something to be overly concerned about, but what MrFrugalFever said about CRA records/files/reports is something that everyone who wants a financial product should be aware of.

Momanns

inspectorperez said:

Very interesting thread this which caught my eye the other day when I was browsing on the forum.

First of all delighted that the OP is now back in business as it were with HSBC albeit that his confidence might have been well and truly shaken with HSBC and the system generally following this short but daunting experience.

It does make me wonder about the amount of subjective judgement applied in these cases by the reporting Money Laundering Officer, in this case the person/ responsible within HSBC.

 I held this role within my own business for a number of years before retirement. It was not a banking business but to the best of my knowledge the appropriate legislation applies across the board to all businesses defined within the relevant Acts of Parliament.

One thing in particular I was always aware of was that the responsibilities were much more onerous on that person than any of his/her director or partner colleagues and could not be covered off with liability insurance. This certainly helps to concentrate one’s mind and it is not too difficult to envisage an over zealous officer reporting anything and everything where there was just the tiniest suspicion of an issue which needed to be reported. I know that I used to keep meticulous records of matters that I did not report with full reasons noted and explained just in case there was ever any comeback. In such instances it would have been much easier just to submit the report and let the regulators do their job of investigating.

Anyway, just an observation which I thought I would post for what it’s worth!

This is half the problem. HSBC file 100's of SARs daily and the MLRO responsibility to delegated to teams. QA/QC work is done on a sample but certainly the MLRO does not have much visibility. All the big banks file 100's of SARs, most of them defensive and poor in quality. There is a SAR reform coming but who knows when.