Proof of Funds - old savings. Is PoF a system that Martin needs to look at.

user1977

(also I see some of us advised you on this over 5 years ago. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing significant has changed in the rules or guidance since then, and there's nothing in either which mandates solicitors to look back decades, so not sure what it is you want changed?)

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6192240/proof-of-funds-long-term-savings-switched-banks-etc#latest

jnorth55

eddddy said:

Is this a hypothetical question, or has a solicitor actually asked you for wage slips and bank statements from decades ago?

Here's the guidance that the Solicitors Regulation Authority give solicitors. (click on "How far back do I need to check when checking source of funds?") ...
https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/resources/money-laundering/aml-questions-answers/

It says that 6 months of history can be sufficient in some cases, but the higher the risk,  the more 'digging' the solicitor should do.


So if a solicitor really does want you to go back decades, I guess there must be something about you which makes the solicitor think you are very high risk! (i.e. very dodgy!)

Your comment does rather show that you haven't read or understood the original post. The main point is that there are no rules so how much digging any solicitor does is down to them &, as I have said, for some it seems that having savings going back 20 or 30 years is something they decide they need more proof of. By throwing 'very dodgy' into your comment you are showing the issue. Again, if you are buying with cash or even putting down a deposit that is perhaps a bit larger than average some solicitors require proof of the source of the funds & if that was decades ago that's difficult. The rules also changed recently to bring in landlords who now need to check proof of funds / source of funds of tenants. 

itsthelittlethings

Are you buying a house?

jnorth55

user1977 said:

jnorth55 said:

Albermarle said:

Brie said:

I think that the problem is that different solicitors may have different ideas about what is required.  It's like banks requiring a passport from someone who never has, nor intends to leave the UK.  

This is the issue, some conveyancers are a bit over keen and others are more pragmatic.

Conveyancers keep telling me that as I can't provide proof of, for example, wage payments decades ago that's a problem

How many conveyancers/solicitors have actually told you that ? One ? Two ? 

To be honest I can't remember the number

So are you saying you have been to several firms of conveyancers and they have all told you that they need a paper trail going back decades? 

If so then you have just been incredibly unlucky, as that sort of absurd request is certainly not typical.

I have really tried to explain. Yes, it is increasingly common for 'proof of source of funds' to be asked for because solicitors don't have set guidance on this. What I'm saying is that there are situations where that isn't possible for quite legitimate reasons but the system doesn't seem to have considered that.

itsthelittlethings

jnorth55 said:

user1977 said:

jnorth55 said:

Albermarle said:

Brie said:

I think that the problem is that different solicitors may have different ideas about what is required.  It's like banks requiring a passport from someone who never has, nor intends to leave the UK.  

This is the issue, some conveyancers are a bit over keen and others are more pragmatic.

Conveyancers keep telling me that as I can't provide proof of, for example, wage payments decades ago that's a problem

How many conveyancers/solicitors have actually told you that ? One ? Two ? 

To be honest I can't remember the number

So are you saying you have been to several firms of conveyancers and they have all told you that they need a paper trail going back decades? 

If so then you have just been incredibly unlucky, as that sort of absurd request is certainly not typical.

I have really tried to explain. Yes, it is increasingly common for 'proof of source of funds' to be asked for because solicitors don't have set guidance on this. What I'm saying is that there are situations where that isn't possible for quite legitimate reasons but the system doesn't seem to have considered that.

I think you’re misunderstanding what solicitors need to see.

jnorth55

itsthelittlethings said:

jnorth55 said:

user1977 said:

jnorth55 said:

Albermarle said:

Brie said:

I think that the problem is that different solicitors may have different ideas about what is required.  It's like banks requiring a passport from someone who never has, nor intends to leave the UK.  

This is the issue, some conveyancers are a bit over keen and others are more pragmatic.

Conveyancers keep telling me that as I can't provide proof of, for example, wage payments decades ago that's a problem

How many conveyancers/solicitors have actually told you that ? One ? Two ? 

To be honest I can't remember the number

So are you saying you have been to several firms of conveyancers and they have all told you that they need a paper trail going back decades? 

If so then you have just been incredibly unlucky, as that sort of absurd request is certainly not typical.

I have really tried to explain. Yes, it is increasingly common for 'proof of source of funds' to be asked for because solicitors don't have set guidance on this. What I'm saying is that there are situations where that isn't possible for quite legitimate reasons but the system doesn't seem to have considered that.

I think you’re misunderstanding what solicitors need to see.

How? I have been told that unless I can prove the source of funds, including the savings I had more than 20 years ago, which is the bulk of said savings, that is a problem. I've been dealing with this for a number of years now. 

jnorth55

user1977 said:

(also I see some of us advised you on this over 5 years ago. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing significant has changed in the rules or guidance since then, and there's nothing in either which mandates solicitors to look back decades, so not sure what it is you want changed?)

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6192240/proof-of-funds-long-term-savings-switched-banks-etc#latest

I'd actually forgotten about that post. All I can add is that I'm still dealing with the same issue. I've pointed out that the 'rules' don't have guidance on all this, inc. set mandates but that doesn't deal with the fact that solicitors are asking for this kind of thing. As I said in another reply, you can look online & find a lot of examples. Also, the AML rules have changed a number of times, including the recent change affecting landlords.

itsthelittlethings

jnorth55 said:

itsthelittlethings said:

jnorth55 said:

user1977 said:

jnorth55 said:

Albermarle said:

Brie said:

I think that the problem is that different solicitors may have different ideas about what is required.  It's like banks requiring a passport from someone who never has, nor intends to leave the UK.  

This is the issue, some conveyancers are a bit over keen and others are more pragmatic.

Conveyancers keep telling me that as I can't provide proof of, for example, wage payments decades ago that's a problem

How many conveyancers/solicitors have actually told you that ? One ? Two ? 

To be honest I can't remember the number

So are you saying you have been to several firms of conveyancers and they have all told you that they need a paper trail going back decades? 

If so then you have just been incredibly unlucky, as that sort of absurd request is certainly not typical.

I have really tried to explain. Yes, it is increasingly common for 'proof of source of funds' to be asked for because solicitors don't have set guidance on this. What I'm saying is that there are situations where that isn't possible for quite legitimate reasons but the system doesn't seem to have considered that.

I think you’re misunderstanding what solicitors need to see.

How? I have been told that unless I can prove the source of funds, including the savings I had more than 20 years ago, which is the bulk of said savings, that is a problem. I've been dealing with this for a number of years now. 

You can go back five years or so and that’s not enough for them? And you’ve tried more than one solicitor?

user1977

jnorth55 said:

itsthelittlethings said:

jnorth55 said:

user1977 said:

jnorth55 said:

Albermarle said:

Brie said:

I think that the problem is that different solicitors may have different ideas about what is required.  It's like banks requiring a passport from someone who never has, nor intends to leave the UK.  

This is the issue, some conveyancers are a bit over keen and others are more pragmatic.

Conveyancers keep telling me that as I can't provide proof of, for example, wage payments decades ago that's a problem

How many conveyancers/solicitors have actually told you that ? One ? Two ? 

To be honest I can't remember the number

So are you saying you have been to several firms of conveyancers and they have all told you that they need a paper trail going back decades? 

If so then you have just been incredibly unlucky, as that sort of absurd request is certainly not typical.

I have really tried to explain. Yes, it is increasingly common for 'proof of source of funds' to be asked for because solicitors don't have set guidance on this. What I'm saying is that there are situations where that isn't possible for quite legitimate reasons but the system doesn't seem to have considered that.

I think you’re misunderstanding what solicitors need to see.

How? I have been told that unless I can prove the source of funds, including the savings I had more than 20 years ago, which is the bulk of said savings, that is a problem. I've been dealing with this for a number of years now. 

So you've spent the last five years being turned away from multiple firms of solicitors because they are demanding decades' worth of paperwork?

Although we've heard some rather odd stories from others here in the past (e.g. an inheritance triggering a request to see deceased granddad's payslips), I find it hard to believe that there are many solicitors wanting to go back decades for proof of funds. They'd hardly likely to be able to get any work done given how few clients would even have that information, and I can't see anyone relishing going through a thick wad of payslips, bank statements etc.

jnorth55

itsthelittlethings said:

jnorth55 said:

itsthelittlethings said:

jnorth55 said:

user1977 said:

jnorth55 said:

Albermarle said:

Brie said:

I think that the problem is that different solicitors may have different ideas about what is required.  It's like banks requiring a passport from someone who never has, nor intends to leave the UK.  

This is the issue, some conveyancers are a bit over keen and others are more pragmatic.

Conveyancers keep telling me that as I can't provide proof of, for example, wage payments decades ago that's a problem

How many conveyancers/solicitors have actually told you that ? One ? Two ? 

To be honest I can't remember the number

So are you saying you have been to several firms of conveyancers and they have all told you that they need a paper trail going back decades? 

If so then you have just been incredibly unlucky, as that sort of absurd request is certainly not typical.

I have really tried to explain. Yes, it is increasingly common for 'proof of source of funds' to be asked for because solicitors don't have set guidance on this. What I'm saying is that there are situations where that isn't possible for quite legitimate reasons but the system doesn't seem to have considered that.

I think you’re misunderstanding what solicitors need to see.

How? I have been told that unless I can prove the source of funds, including the savings I had more than 20 years ago, which is the bulk of said savings, that is a problem. I've been dealing with this for a number of years now. 

You can go back five years or so and that’s not enough for them? And you’ve tried more than one solicitor?

I have repeatedly said yes.