Recent experiences withdrawing a few thousand in cash

hallmark

I might be withdrawing low thousands (maximum £3k) soon from either Nationwide or Natwest.  I was expecting to have to give the branch notice & provide ID but Natwest appear to go even further:

"be prepared for our branch colleagues to ask further questions about your withdrawal request which can sometimes take up to 30 minutes"

& also

"In some instances, we may decline the cash withdrawal based on the information provided surrounding the transaction."

Now I don't mind jumping through hoops to a moderate degree but I'm really not up for a 30 minute interview in order to obtain a small amount of my own money, for purposes which are absolutely none of Natwest's business.  I'm also slightly intrigued to know how long the interview will last & what the outcome will be as I'm intending to politely tell them I have no desire to divulge what I'll be doing with my money & shouldn't need to.

I do understand that they need reasonable precautions. I'm prepared to notify them, provide ID or meet other reasonable demands.  A 30-minute interview I have to "pass" in order to get my own money sounds way over the top though.

Anyhoo, I'm wondering if anybody has anecdotal stories of withdrawing cash from either institution or really any bank lately, so I'm better geared up for the faff.

thanks

cymruchris

What's your ATM limit? If the max you'll need is £3k, and your card allows £500 a day - you'd have the whole lot in a few days without a single question.

Otherwise they just want to make sure you're not being scammed - so as much as it's your money - if you're clear on why you want it - and you can be sure it's for a genuine purpose, I don't think you'll have too much trouble at that value withdrawal.

DullGreyGuy

Barclays require 24 hours notice for a withdrawal over £2,000 (though have done slightly more without notice and just got a telling off about following due process next time). It was claimed simply to be an operational matter that there isn't much cash floating around the branch and a notable withdrawal for one customer could impact their ability to service others... no idea if this is true or usual corporate myth. 

The "30 minutes" may not all be interview but the process of getting the monies ready for you. 

Bigwheels1111

First Direct are good for cash.
They let you take out 2k a day at cash machines.
All with one call.
I have 3 accounts with them so 6k a day if need be.

prowla

I was watching a scammers programme on BBC and their trick was to get their victim to take £2700 out of their account and deposit it in the scammer's one.

I suppose the banks having a chat could be considered due-diligence.

(In that case the line they gave was that they were investigating fraudulent activity at the branch and the money trail would help expose the misreants.)

etienneg

hallmark,

I respectfully suggest that if you go in with the attitude you display in your post, the bank is likely to decline your request for the cash. Any escalation to the use of bad language or rudeness to bank employees would simply lead to the bank closing your account and declining to do business with you in future. The same sort of thing applies to other banks, so don't just think you can move elsewhere and be any better off.

These days there is much more regulation on financial institutions than in the past. This places heavy responsibilities on them in respect of money laundering, so they are only trying to act lawfully and within the regulations. Use of cash for anything other than small transactions naturally raises questions, so your statement "I have no desire to divulge what I'll be doing with my money & shouldn't need to" is just plain wrong.

"Why don't you use a bank transfer, or cheque, or other such means to move your money?" is a perfectly reasonable question. Large amounts in cash naturally raises suspicions of illicit activity - drug dealing, stolen property, illegal imports, etc. - in other words, classic money laundering. Surely you see this? A little more reasonableness on your part would help a lot.

saajan_12

Firstly it's your money, but you decided to involve that particular bank who said they'd look after your money if you followed their procedures, including this due diligence.

Secondly, the government and regulators, driven by public opinion, are pushing banks to take more of the responsibility when their customers get scammed by 3rd parties. Even if the bank did nothing to steal your money, if you were withdrawing a sum distinctly larger than your usual transaction size, and handed it over to a scammer, the back might be partially liable for not questioning it sufficiently. 

GazzaBloom

Maybe I'm being cynical but I suggest the banks are stepping up their diligence to reduce the amount they lose to repaying customers back who have be defrauded. Self interest rather than genuine care for their customers plight.

MattMattMattUK

GazzaBloom said:

Maybe I'm being cynical but I suggest the banks are stepping up their diligence to reduce the amount they lose to repaying customers back who have be defrauded. Self interest rather than genuine care for their customers plight.

Either way the end result is that the cost of some people's stupidity is currently passed onto those who are sensible enough not to throw their money away. Because of that I am glad the banks are introducing enough due checks that they are absolved of responsibility, because that absolves the likes of you and I from having to pay for the consequences. 

prowla

etienneg said:

hallmark,

I respectfully suggest that if you go in with the attitude you display in your post, the bank is likely to decline your request for the cash. Any escalation to the use of bad language or rudeness to bank employees would simply lead to the bank closing your account and declining to do business with you in future. The same sort of thing applies to other banks, so don't just think you can move elsewhere and be any better off.

These days there is much more regulation on financial institutions than in the past. This places heavy responsibilities on them in respect of money laundering, so they are only trying to act lawfully and within the regulations. Use of cash for anything other than small transactions naturally raises questions, so your statement "I have no desire to divulge what I'll be doing with my money & shouldn't need to" is just plain wrong.

"Why don't you use a bank transfer, or cheque, or other such means to move your money?" is a perfectly reasonable question. Large amounts in cash naturally raises suspicions of illicit activity - drug dealing, stolen property, illegal imports, etc. - in other words, classic money laundering. Surely you see this? A little more reasonableness on your part would help a lot.

That's an overreaction to the OP's post.

Bigwheels1111

The world, the uk and the government want us to go cashless by the looks of it.
My friends wife was a HSBC manager, he now keeps cash at home in a safe.
Not happy with the way it’s going, a bit paranoid maybe 🤔 
He needs cash in a hurry to buy a car when it comes up for sale.

I carry £20 in my phone case, a few quid in coins for parking.
The rest is contactless via phone.
I don’t think I’ve carried a bank card for near on 4 years.
Well no I’d to be honest.
No since week 2 of COVID lockdown.