DF Capital

mills112

masonic said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

i know that amounts over a certain X will trigger questions, so it may be the 100k that trigger questions.  i know that AML is not related to the FSCS limit, i was saying that it is the increase in the FSCS limit that made me put more than 100k into an account and so the AML has been triggered, where I never had any issue before.

That still only demonstrates correlation, rather than causation, i.e. AML for a transaction over £100K doesn't imply that it's because it exceeded £100K....

i suppose you are right but i have never had this issue before and i have invested with at least 20 banks during my time and the only difference here is the amount is more than 85k it may be the imporant factor here.

But if this is the first of those transactions since tweaks to the AML regulations (or their implementation) then that's at least as likely to be the important difference.

but i put in 35k into investec and 35k into kent reliance at the same time and they have been fine.  no issue at all. so it can't be this new AML regulations.

The thread now appears to have been deleted, but someone else was complaining of experiencing this with another bank today.

It is a shame it's gone as it contained useful information, including that these changes are being rolled out gradually (also mentioned earlier in this thread).

do you happen to remember the name of the bank that they mentioned so I can avoid them?  i need to look for another bank now to open an account (annoyed emoticon)

Notepad_Phil

mills112 said:

masonic said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

i know that amounts over a certain X will trigger questions, so it may be the 100k that trigger questions.  i know that AML is not related to the FSCS limit, i was saying that it is the increase in the FSCS limit that made me put more than 100k into an account and so the AML has been triggered, where I never had any issue before.

That still only demonstrates correlation, rather than causation, i.e. AML for a transaction over £100K doesn't imply that it's because it exceeded £100K....

i suppose you are right but i have never had this issue before and i have invested with at least 20 banks during my time and the only difference here is the amount is more than 85k it may be the imporant factor here.

But if this is the first of those transactions since tweaks to the AML regulations (or their implementation) then that's at least as likely to be the important difference.

but i put in 35k into investec and 35k into kent reliance at the same time and they have been fine.  no issue at all. so it can't be this new AML regulations.

The thread now appears to have been deleted, but someone else was complaining of experiencing this with another bank today.

It is a shame it's gone as it contained useful information, including that these changes are being rolled out gradually (also mentioned earlier in this thread).

do you happen to remember the name of the bank that they mentioned so I can avoid them?  i need to look for another bank now to open an account (annoyed emoticon)

I remember the thread too and I'm pretty sure it was a Vanquis account that was being discussed. And doing a google of "vanquis aml" brings up in its list a thread from today which when clicked takes you to a deleted post, so I think I'm right in thinking it was Vanquis.

masonic

Notepad_Phil said:

mills112 said:

masonic said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

i know that amounts over a certain X will trigger questions, so it may be the 100k that trigger questions.  i know that AML is not related to the FSCS limit, i was saying that it is the increase in the FSCS limit that made me put more than 100k into an account and so the AML has been triggered, where I never had any issue before.

That still only demonstrates correlation, rather than causation, i.e. AML for a transaction over £100K doesn't imply that it's because it exceeded £100K....

i suppose you are right but i have never had this issue before and i have invested with at least 20 banks during my time and the only difference here is the amount is more than 85k it may be the imporant factor here.

But if this is the first of those transactions since tweaks to the AML regulations (or their implementation) then that's at least as likely to be the important difference.

but i put in 35k into investec and 35k into kent reliance at the same time and they have been fine.  no issue at all. so it can't be this new AML regulations.

The thread now appears to have been deleted, but someone else was complaining of experiencing this with another bank today.

It is a shame it's gone as it contained useful information, including that these changes are being rolled out gradually (also mentioned earlier in this thread).

do you happen to remember the name of the bank that they mentioned so I can avoid them?  i need to look for another bank now to open an account (annoyed emoticon)

I remember the thread too and I'm pretty sure it was a Vanquis account that was being discussed. And doing a google of "vanquis aml" brings up in its list a thread from today which when clicked takes you to a deleted post, so I think I'm right in thinking it was Vanquis.

Yes, I wouldn't have been able to recall the bank from memory, but now I see it my memory is jogged.

There is also this thread from a few days ago: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6646792/vanquis-source-of-wealth-docs

Malchester

I had a savings account with Wealthify. Built up £60k in it. Requested £10k withdrawal and was refused until i provided physical proof of all my accounts along with statements showing my total cash savings in every account I had

artyboy

masonic said:

Notepad_Phil said:

mills112 said:

masonic said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

i know that amounts over a certain X will trigger questions, so it may be the 100k that trigger questions.  i know that AML is not related to the FSCS limit, i was saying that it is the increase in the FSCS limit that made me put more than 100k into an account and so the AML has been triggered, where I never had any issue before.

That still only demonstrates correlation, rather than causation, i.e. AML for a transaction over £100K doesn't imply that it's because it exceeded £100K....

i suppose you are right but i have never had this issue before and i have invested with at least 20 banks during my time and the only difference here is the amount is more than 85k it may be the imporant factor here.

But if this is the first of those transactions since tweaks to the AML regulations (or their implementation) then that's at least as likely to be the important difference.

but i put in 35k into investec and 35k into kent reliance at the same time and they have been fine.  no issue at all. so it can't be this new AML regulations.

The thread now appears to have been deleted, but someone else was complaining of experiencing this with another bank today.

It is a shame it's gone as it contained useful information, including that these changes are being rolled out gradually (also mentioned earlier in this thread).

do you happen to remember the name of the bank that they mentioned so I can avoid them?  i need to look for another bank now to open an account (annoyed emoticon)

I remember the thread too and I'm pretty sure it was a Vanquis account that was being discussed. And doing a google of "vanquis aml" brings up in its list a thread from today which when clicked takes you to a deleted post, so I think I'm right in thinking it was Vanquis.

Yes, I wouldn't have been able to recall the bank from memory, but now I see it my memory is jogged.

There is also this thread from a few days ago: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6646792/vanquis-source-of-wealth-docs

I'm inclined to believe that this is more a case of excessive zeal in interpreting regs by less sophisticated or smaller players, rather than a broader trend of intrusive questions under the banner of "AML checks". 

I'm familiar with all of these questions and why they MAY be needed, but even where they are, they tend to be handled with a lot more sensitivity and tact. Often as part of a face to face conversation with a relationship manager or similar (because this is more the sort of thing that you might delve into with HNW clients and upwards). 

But when they are just written as bluntly as that and shoved under a - no offence - retail customer's nose, with no real context offered, I'd be more than a bit put out. 

Financial services is often a delicate balance between commercial pressures and good risk management, but it's clear where the balance of power is with these organisations. Either that or they are just plain stupid.

masonic

Malchester said:

I had a savings account with Wealthify. Built up £60k in it. Requested £10k withdrawal and was refused until i provided physical proof of all my accounts along with statements showing my total cash savings in every account I had

I do fear this will become widespread.

But, how is asking someone to volunteer proof of all of their savings accounts, without any knowledge of which accounts they may hold, going to be effective in the actual case someone is money laundering? It is like asking a credit applicant to disclose their credit history and relying on what they shared being complete.

mills112

Notepad_Phil said:

mills112 said:

masonic said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

i know that amounts over a certain X will trigger questions, so it may be the 100k that trigger questions.  i know that AML is not related to the FSCS limit, i was saying that it is the increase in the FSCS limit that made me put more than 100k into an account and so the AML has been triggered, where I never had any issue before.

That still only demonstrates correlation, rather than causation, i.e. AML for a transaction over £100K doesn't imply that it's because it exceeded £100K....

i suppose you are right but i have never had this issue before and i have invested with at least 20 banks during my time and the only difference here is the amount is more than 85k it may be the imporant factor here.

But if this is the first of those transactions since tweaks to the AML regulations (or their implementation) then that's at least as likely to be the important difference.

but i put in 35k into investec and 35k into kent reliance at the same time and they have been fine.  no issue at all. so it can't be this new AML regulations.

The thread now appears to have been deleted, but someone else was complaining of experiencing this with another bank today.

It is a shame it's gone as it contained useful information, including that these changes are being rolled out gradually (also mentioned earlier in this thread).

do you happen to remember the name of the bank that they mentioned so I can avoid them?  i need to look for another bank now to open an account (annoyed emoticon)

I remember the thread too and I'm pretty sure it was a Vanquis account that was being discussed. And doing a google of "vanquis aml" brings up in its list a thread from today which when clicked takes you to a deleted post, so I think I'm right in thinking it was Vanquis.

ha ha, that was the other bank i was thinking of opening an account with but their rate is lower now on the rank sheet.  habib zurich has just entered the foray, so i have applied for an account with them.  i had an account with them before and they were fine.

mills112

artyboy said:

masonic said:

Notepad_Phil said:

mills112 said:

masonic said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

i know that amounts over a certain X will trigger questions, so it may be the 100k that trigger questions.  i know that AML is not related to the FSCS limit, i was saying that it is the increase in the FSCS limit that made me put more than 100k into an account and so the AML has been triggered, where I never had any issue before.

That still only demonstrates correlation, rather than causation, i.e. AML for a transaction over £100K doesn't imply that it's because it exceeded £100K....

i suppose you are right but i have never had this issue before and i have invested with at least 20 banks during my time and the only difference here is the amount is more than 85k it may be the imporant factor here.

But if this is the first of those transactions since tweaks to the AML regulations (or their implementation) then that's at least as likely to be the important difference.

but i put in 35k into investec and 35k into kent reliance at the same time and they have been fine.  no issue at all. so it can't be this new AML regulations.

The thread now appears to have been deleted, but someone else was complaining of experiencing this with another bank today.

It is a shame it's gone as it contained useful information, including that these changes are being rolled out gradually (also mentioned earlier in this thread).

do you happen to remember the name of the bank that they mentioned so I can avoid them?  i need to look for another bank now to open an account (annoyed emoticon)

I remember the thread too and I'm pretty sure it was a Vanquis account that was being discussed. And doing a google of "vanquis aml" brings up in its list a thread from today which when clicked takes you to a deleted post, so I think I'm right in thinking it was Vanquis.

Yes, I wouldn't have been able to recall the bank from memory, but now I see it my memory is jogged.

There is also this thread from a few days ago: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6646792/vanquis-source-of-wealth-docs

I'm inclined to believe that this is more a case of excessive zeal in interpreting regs by less sophisticated or smaller players, rather than a broader trend of intrusive questions under the banner of "AML checks". 

I'm familiar with all of these questions and why they MAY be needed, but even where they are, they tend to be handled with a lot more sensitivity and tact. Often as part of a face to face conversation with a relationship manager or similar (because this is more the sort of thing that you might delve into with HNW clients and upwards). 

But when they are just written as bluntly as that and shoved under a - no offence - retail customer's nose, with no real context offered, I'd be more than a bit put out. 

Financial services is often a delicate balance between commercial pressures and good risk management, but it's clear where the balance of power is with these organisations. Either that or they are just plain stupid.

as i had said earlier, i do feel it is the smaller banks that don't really know what they are doing and so just following a script without actually thinking about it.

i had put in 120k and they had asked me where the money came from when i made the application and i had said savings. so really the AML here is to confirm that the money is actually from a savings account as i had stated, and in fact it is from a mature 12 months account.  so really, if they had asked me this, then i could easily send over my matured bond proceeds confirmation from HL and that would be fine.  I can't see why they need to establish my annual salary and my wealth when really all they need to do is to satisfy themselves that this 120k credit is legit because that is their problem and the rest of my wealth is not their problem, it is someone's else problem that i had invested with.

they aren't the police, they aren't HMRC so why are they asking for minute details of my finance and god knows how secure that is going to be when they have all these documents and it get stolen.  just crazy.

fuzzzzy

mills112 said:

masonic said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

eskbanker said:

mills112 said:

i know that amounts over a certain X will trigger questions, so it may be the 100k that trigger questions.  i know that AML is not related to the FSCS limit, i was saying that it is the increase in the FSCS limit that made me put more than 100k into an account and so the AML has been triggered, where I never had any issue before.

That still only demonstrates correlation, rather than causation, i.e. AML for a transaction over £100K doesn't imply that it's because it exceeded £100K....

i suppose you are right but i have never had this issue before and i have invested with at least 20 banks during my time and the only difference here is the amount is more than 85k it may be the imporant factor here.

But if this is the first of those transactions since tweaks to the AML regulations (or their implementation) then that's at least as likely to be the important difference.

but i put in 35k into investec and 35k into kent reliance at the same time and they have been fine.  no issue at all. so it can't be this new AML regulations.

The thread now appears to have been deleted, but someone else was complaining of experiencing this with another bank today.

It is a shame it's gone as it contained useful information, including that these changes are being rolled out gradually (also mentioned earlier in this thread).

do you happen to remember the name of the bank that they mentioned so I can avoid them?  i need to look for another bank now to open an account (annoyed emoticon)

It was definitely Vanquis that was mentioned - I contributed to the thread because I have opened an account with them which I have not funded yet and it concerned me a bit.