No Photo ID

masonic

happybagger said:

masonic said:

I see a valid passport as the gateway to free money, 

Only ever had one bank reject my online application, which it seemed was due to me putting my middle initial in.  Never had any other issue anywhere. Yet my last passport expired 23 years ago.

For some, it might be a gateway to get free money, I don't see it. For me a passport would be for going abroad, which I believe is its intended purpose. There was a page in it about allowing "safe passage" IIRC, not about "opening savings accounts"

If you're disputing that some banks require photo-ID in order to open an account with them, then I suggest you do some research, because I can assure you that some do. I've never travelled on my current passport, but it has allowed me to open several accounts for switching incentives, cashback, etc that have netted me around £500 I wouldn't have had if I didn't have it. In my view it has paid for itself even if I never use it for its intended purpose. There are still plenty of banks who do not insist on government issued photo ID from all customers, but the tide is turning. Now that receiving banks are going to have to cover some of the cost of money fraudulently sent to accounts they provide to fraudsters, you can expect them to go to greater lengths to ensure the person applying for an account is really who they think it is. Hence the rise of verification services set up to match an applicant on camera to a photo on a government issued ID document.

kuratowski

masonic said:

There are still plenty of banks who do not insist on government issued photo ID from all customers, but the tide is turning. Now that receiving banks are going to have to cover some of the cost of money fraudulently sent to accounts they provide to fraudsters, you can expect them to go to greater lengths to ensure the person applying for an account is really who they think it is. Hence the rise of verification services set up to match an applicant on camera to a photo on a government issued ID document.

Not only banks; employers, landlords, estate agents and solicitors also bear a legal duty to verify identification.  By far the easiest and quickest way to satisfy all organisations with whom you come into contact is to keep a current passport or driving licence.

BooJewels

I certainly had to stop application processes with banks where I reached the stage of requiring photo ID in the not that distant past.  And now that I have it, I've used it twice recently with selling an estate property, with the solicitors AML checks and gifting some money to my son to help him buy a house - same checks.  It was having problems selling an earlier estate house that forced me to get my passport - not having one had proved to be a real nuisance.

AmityNeon

WeeBawbee said:

AmityNeon said:

It costs less than £10 a year to maintain validity, so you can either accept it by budgeting accordingly,

Hmm, at £10/year, it’d take 9 years to save up for one. Your tone is very unhelpful, IMHO.

You seem to want help finding workarounds. Prioritise getting a passport for ID purposes; it will make life much easier. £2 a week for 10 months, then £10 a year.

This issue comes up constantly due to the UK’s lack of a national identity document, whether it’s another round of fresh 18 year-olds facing difficulties proving their age, or those who are unable to drive and don’t have a valid passport. You can try fighting the system, but it will only get harder as fraud becomes more sophisticated in this increasingly digital age.

CKhalvashi

AmityNeon said:

WeeBawbee said:

AmityNeon said:

It costs less than £10 a year to maintain validity, so you can either accept it by budgeting accordingly,

Hmm, at £10/year, it’d take 9 years to save up for one. Your tone is very unhelpful, IMHO.

You seem to want help finding workarounds. Prioritise getting a passport for ID purposes; it will make life much easier. £2 a week for 10 months, then £10 a year.

This issue comes up constantly due to the UK’s lack of a national identity document, whether it’s another round of fresh 18 year-olds facing difficulties proving their age, or those who are unable to drive and don’t have a valid passport. You can try fighting the system, but it will only get harder as fraud becomes more sophisticated in this increasingly digital age.

The other problem comes with right to work checks etc.

We typically will accept only a passport (although have the right to accept other documents) as no other photo ID will prove the person and the holding of x citizenship and the right to be in the UK.

In addition, a passport is required for most roles we have in any event, so it's one of the few documents we expect there to consistently be.

Section62

AmityNeon said:

happybagger said:

AmityNeon said:

I accepted long ago it was never just a ‘travel’ document,

Which is fine as you're concerned, that's what you have come to accept it as. However, that is exactly what it is. I assume you travel abroad, which would be the reason you got it?

...
I have dual citizenship and maintain two active passports as well as a (free) national ID card. Since I was a child old enough to understand the concept of proving one’s identity, I’ve always wanted the UK to implement (free) national ID cards, but I stopped caring when the British public were seemingly wary of such a concept, so I just accepted the British passport as de facto government-issued UK ID.

...

That was never the offer (which could explain why the British public were 'seemingly wary').  As the cost of implementing a scheme rose, the Government announced the cost of a standalone card would be £30.  To get a card you'd first have to have your biometrics taken, which would be done by retailers able to set their own charges, but estimated to be an additional £30.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3127696.stm

So £60 (in 2009 prices) to get a (compulsory) ID card, rather than "free" - and that was after the cost of a passport had been increased (by £30 IIRC) to help pay for the initial development of the scheme.

As I recall the British public were primarily concerned about ID cards turning into another money pit that the elected government were going to throw the public's cash into in the name of 'security'.  The usual opaqueness about the true costs further added to the feeling of being ripped off.

p00hsticks

BooJewels said:

I certainly had to stop application processes with banks where I reached the stage of requiring photo ID in the not that distant past.  And now that I have it, I've used it twice recently with selling an estate property, with the solicitors AML checks and gifting some money to my son to help him buy a house - same checks.  It was having problems selling an earlier estate house that forced me to get my passport - not having one had proved to be a real nuisance.

Yes, I second this. It was attempting to carry out my duties as executor of an estate that prompted me to get a passport.
I found banks demanding to see photo ID before they would release money to me or let me set up an account for estate funds, and also required by the estate agent and conveyancer when selling the estate property. 

AmityNeon

Section62 said:

AmityNeon said:

happybagger said:

AmityNeon said:

I accepted long ago it was never just a ‘travel’ document,

Which is fine as you're concerned, that's what you have come to accept it as. However, that is exactly what it is. I assume you travel abroad, which would be the reason you got it?

I have dual citizenship and maintain two active passports as well as a (free) national ID card. Since I was a child old enough to understand the concept of proving one’s identity, I’ve always wanted the UK to implement (free) national ID cards, but I stopped caring when the British public were seemingly wary of such a concept, so I just accepted the British passport as de facto government-issued UK ID.

That was never the offer (which could explain why the British public were 'seemingly wary'). As the cost of implementing a scheme rose, the Government announced the cost of a standalone card would be £30. To get a card you'd first have to have your biometrics taken, which would be done by retailers able to set their own charges, but estimated to be an additional £30.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3127696.stm

So £60 (in 2009 prices) to get a (compulsory) ID card, rather than "free" - and that was after the cost of a passport had been increased (by £30 IIRC) to help pay for the initial development of the scheme.

As I recall the British public were primarily concerned about ID cards turning into another money pit that the elected government were going to throw the public's cash into in the name of 'security'. The usual opaqueness about the true costs further added to the feeling of being ripped off.

Compulsory ID should be free (as my national ID is). Voluntary ID (e.g. passports) not necessarily so.

As per the linked article for why the British public were/are seemingly wary:

Why have the plans changed?

The Home Office is under pressure to cut costs. Public support for the scheme has also been hit by a series of data loss scandals, although the government claims the majority of people are still in favour of it.

What are their objections?

Critics say identity cards interfere with civil liberties, are too expensive and will do little to tackle problems like terrorism and illegal immigration. There are also fears the cards will antagonise ethnic minority communities targeted by police stop and search operations. They are not happy that the only people forced to have cards will be foreign nationals. Some critics also claim the scheme will not work and that the cards will be too easily faked - something denied by the Home Office.

Why did Britain get rid of ID cards after World War II?

During the WWII the National Register of ID cards was seen as a way of protecting the nation from Nazi spies. But in 1952, Winston Churchill's government scrapped the cards. The feeling was that in peacetime they simply were not needed. In fact they were thought to be hindering the work of the police, because so many people resented being asked to produce a card to prove their identity. The National Register became the NHS register, which is still in use today.

So my response was and is: OK, passport and driving licence it is for the UK.

I'm also used to being (randomly) asked to produce proof of ID by authorities, so I guess I lack certain British sensibilities regarding civil liberties.

masonic

AmityNeon said:

Compulsory ID should be free (as my national ID is). Voluntary ID (e.g. passports) not necessarily so.

It can never be free, the cost can be hidden in general taxation, but such a scheme will always cost the public. An entirely new scheme will cost more than co-opting an existing non-compulsory system as has been done in this case. Perhaps what is needed is more targeted concessions on the passport fee.

xylophone

My parents forced me abroad when I was a baby.

What a very strange thing to say!

Did you expect to be consulted?

Or to be left on some good soul's doorstep with a note asking for you to be cared for as your loving parents felt that you needed to be left in the UK until you could choose for yourself?