New Barclays account to be closed, No reason given

born_again

grumpy_codger said:

flaneurs_lobster said:

grumpy_codger said:

Yorkie1 said:

ivormonee said:

trient said:

some internal exchanges that alluded to suspicion of fraud

It seems an exceptionally low bar to have bank accounts unilaterally closed on mere suspicion of fraud, without anything more tangible. In theory, most transactions could potentially allude to suspicion of fraud whereas in reality they are normal transactions for the account holder! What banks ought to be doing, to be seen to be fair, is to question the account holder if any suspicions arise for them, thereby giving them the opportunity to provide explanations and/ or evidence to allay those suspicions, rather than just point-blank closing the account.

Whilst not disagreeing with the sentiment of your post, the law specifically forbids banks from doing this (the anti-money laundering tipping-off rules).

Can you quote the part of the rules specifically forbidding asking questions?

Don't think there's any rules about asking questions,...

Yes, that was exactly my point. 

If so, then the statement that the law "specifically forbids banks"  "to question the account holder" is nothing but an urban myth or some overzealous interpretation of the term 'tipping-off'.

Basic rule is front line staff will not say or answer questions. Better to stay stum, than risk the sack or even worse a jail term.
As that is delt with by a specialist team with expert training in questioning. 👍

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/anti-money-laundering/tipping-off-a-client

grumpy_codger

born_again said:

grumpy_codger said:

flaneurs_lobster said:

grumpy_codger said:

Yorkie1 said:

ivormonee said:

trient said:

some internal exchanges that alluded to suspicion of fraud

It seems an exceptionally low bar to have bank accounts unilaterally closed on mere suspicion of fraud, without anything more tangible. In theory, most transactions could potentially allude to suspicion of fraud whereas in reality they are normal transactions for the account holder! What banks ought to be doing, to be seen to be fair, is to question the account holder if any suspicions arise for them, thereby giving them the opportunity to provide explanations and/ or evidence to allay those suspicions, rather than just point-blank closing the account.

Whilst not disagreeing with the sentiment of your post, the law specifically forbids banks from doing this (the anti-money laundering tipping-off rules).

Can you quote the part of the rules specifically forbidding asking questions?

Don't think there's any rules about asking questions,...

Yes, that was exactly my point. 

If so, then the statement that the law "specifically forbids banks"  "to question the account holder" is nothing but an urban myth or some overzealous interpretation of the term 'tipping-off'.

Basic rule is front line staff will not say or answer questions. Better to stay stum, than risk the sack or even worse a jail term.
As that is delt with by a specialist team with expert training in questioning. 👍

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/anti-money-laundering/tipping-off-a-client

Yet again, that's just some internal rule, not the law that I originally asked to quote. 
With regard to the link, I skim-read the content and haven't noticed anything about asking the customer to answer some questions if there are any. And it's the backoffice staff that is closing accounts  that, IMO, is supposed to ask questions, not  the 'frontline staff'.

ChewyyBacca

trient said:

Brie said:

They won't / can't tell you why in case that is tipping you off in some way.  And I've never heard of anyone reversing a decision.

I am living proof it can happen. I had a very similar situation, opened a Premier account a few years back, a few days later got closed with no explanation and all relationships severed (the PRM and customer support would no longer speak to me). I asked for a SAR which revealed some internal exchanges that alluded to suspicion of fraud. I went to the CEO executive team and asked for a formal review, and a couple weeks later they invited me back into branch to open a new account. Been friends ever since. 

trient Thank you for the very useful input. Your case highlights the ALM programs are dumb. Flagging of an account as fraud & coming out clean in formal review.
I had exactly 3 transactions, hard to deduce fraud on that basis, in 10 days.
Any particular team to make SAR request to? Im still toying with the idea of taking it all the way or just leave it be.
Particularly annoyed that they do hard check on credit, so that hit on my file in vain, if they close the account.

eskbanker

ChewyyBacca said:

Any particular team to make SAR request to?

The SAR process will be explained in each bank's published privacy policy, so Barclays link from https://www.barclays.co.uk/important-information/control-your-data/ to the form to be used: https://forms-int.barclays.co.uk/forms/gdpr?execution=e1s1

Eco_Miser

Grumpy_chap said:

boingy said:

The "tipping-off" thing always has me a bit puzzled. If you're up to no good and your account gets frozen surely that a pretty big clue that you've been rumbled. You'd have to be daft to think anything else.

And most people are not up to no good!

The "tipping off" part is not about preventing the individual from realising they've been rumbled, but preventing the individual from being able to access the possibly ill-gotten gains.

Consider an individual who the bank suspects of receiving money from money-mule activity or selling drugs or whatever.
If the bank simply freezes that account while they do their investigations, then the individual is aware that they have been rumbled but there is nothing the individual can do about it.
If the back phones the individual and asks them to clarify the source of the funds, the individual will be moving those funds out while the call is in progress, so the bank might then freeze the account but by that time the individual is largely un-bothered.

So freeze the account, then ask the questions - immediately. Then unfreeze the account when the customer provides a satisfactory explanation, or keep it frozen if they don't. 

Either way, the innocent customer discovers that their innocent activity looks like money laundering, or the money launderer discovers they've been rumbled, but can't do anything about it. Better result for the innocent, same result for the not-so-innocent.

trient

ChewyyBacca said:

trient said:

Brie said:

They won't / can't tell you why in case that is tipping you off in some way.  And I've never heard of anyone reversing a decision.

I am living proof it can happen. I had a very similar situation, opened a Premier account a few years back, a few days later got closed with no explanation and all relationships severed (the PRM and customer support would no longer speak to me). I asked for a SAR which revealed some internal exchanges that alluded to suspicion of fraud. I went to the CEO executive team and asked for a formal review, and a couple weeks later they invited me back into branch to open a new account. Been friends ever since. 

trient Thank you for the very useful input. Your case highlights the ALM programs are dumb. Flagging of an account as fraud & coming out clean in formal review.
I had exactly 3 transactions, hard to deduce fraud on that basis, in 10 days.
Any particular team to make SAR request to? Im still toying with the idea of taking it all the way or just leave it be.
Particularly annoyed that they do hard check on credit, so that hit on my file in vain, if they close the account.

The SAR TBH might behit and miss. I think I was lucky to get and see the internal messages they shared on my first SAR request because it proved to me beyond any doubt that it was an obvious mixup. Later on I asked for another SAR out of curiosity to see what the follow up internal messages said, but that time they didn't share any - they only provided data they had from me.

What I suggest is what really work for me. I wrote the CEO directly and my case was picked up by his executive complaints team. I don't have an email from them as I only interacted with individuals who may not be there anymore (this was more than 5 years ago) but you can try calling them at 0207 116 8012. Or write to the CEO.

ChewyyBacca

trient said:

ChewyyBacca said:

trient said:

Brie said:

They won't / can't tell you why in case that is tipping you off in some way.  And I've never heard of anyone reversing a decision.

I am living proof it can happen. I had a very similar situation, opened a Premier account a few years back, a few days later got closed with no explanation and all relationships severed (the PRM and customer support would no longer speak to me). I asked for a SAR which revealed some internal exchanges that alluded to suspicion of fraud. I went to the CEO executive team and asked for a formal review, and a couple weeks later they invited me back into branch to open a new account. Been friends ever since. 

trient Thank you for the very useful input. Your case highlights the ALM programs are dumb. Flagging of an account as fraud & coming out clean in formal review.
I had exactly 3 transactions, hard to deduce fraud on that basis, in 10 days.
Any particular team to make SAR request to? Im still toying with the idea of taking it all the way or just leave it be.
Particularly annoyed that they do hard check on credit, so that hit on my file in vain, if they close the account.

The SAR TBH might behit and miss. I think I was lucky to get and see the internal messages they shared on my first SAR request because it proved to me beyond any doubt that it was an obvious mixup. Later on I asked for another SAR out of curiosity to see what the follow up internal messages said, but that time they didn't share any - they only provided data they had from me.

What I suggest is what really work for me. I wrote the CEO directly and my case was picked up by his executive complaints team. I don't have an email from them as I only interacted with individuals who may not be there anymore (this was more than 5 years ago) but you can try calling them at 0207 116 8012. Or write to the CEO.

Thanks. Im putting in the SAR request first. And will contact the number too.

They sent a letter they are closing my Credit card too.
Im really surprised and annoyed.

moneyaspie2024

GTR_King said:

They have made the decision as don’t like something that has happened on your account, when you apply for Barclays they give you list of all accounts available! So saying premier account we only available when applying seems odd! If you applied for premier account but falsely said you met the requirements that’s a reason to close it down!

Apologies for bumping but that definitely wouldn’t be the reason, unless OP falsified their income in order to obtain it but it’s not fraud if you are honest about your income at application stage and Barclays allow you to have it anyway as in my case, that’s their prerogative, other than that if you wearnt meeting the eligibility after 12 months they would just downgrade the account to a standard BBA.

An AML flag has been triggered hence they can’t give a reason for the closure, but it would have nothing to do with the reason you give so long as the person was honest about their earnings ect when they made the application. Lots of people have been able to upgrade without even nearly meeting the criteria.  

moneyaspie2024

flaneurs_lobster said:

Grumpy_chap said:

AIUI Barclays Premier Account has a fee and also a minimum salary / deposit requirement.

No fee.Blurb from website

Premier Current Account

Take your banking to the next level
No monthly fee
Eligibility criteria applies.
Premier eligibility
You’ll need to have a current account with us and either pay in a gross annual income of at least £75,000 – or have a total balance of at least £100,000 in savings with us, in eligible investments, or a mix of both(1).

Even so if someone with a premier account was no longer eligible for it the account would be downgraded to a BBA in normal circumstances, not closed.