AML/source of funds complications of having many Regular Savers

Enzo_L

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938214#Comment_81938214

But solicitors are told to look out for any other "activity" thrown up by the evidence they're provided with and to enquire about it. If a photocopy is retained and there's something on the document that raises the interest of the SRA the solicitor has to show that they've enquired about it and obtained evidence that the "activity" is legitimate.

That's one aspect of how the whole thing is such a pain. Solicitors hate it.

The best thing a client can do is try to provide documentation which shows clear chains of only relevant transactions and little, or preferably nothing, else. Then no enquiries need to be raised. But that is probably much easier said that done for people like us on this site.

I'm thinking of moving in the next two years, buying a new place and doing it up and then selling my house without having to worry about selling and buying at the same time, but I'm already concerned about how I can prove the source of funds for the cash purchase of my new place before I've even decided where I'm going!

masonic

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938264#Comment_81938264

Believe me that is what I sought to do. But my solicitor has done things by the book, so required three months of payslips and bank statements showing the money credited. These bank statements obviously contained some other activity, but thankfully it seems to have been recognised as the movement of funds between savings accounts in my name. I had a load of savings statements at the ready to satisfy any further enquiries, just in case.

What I've learned in the past few months is that source of funds requirements are now being imposed on savings and investment providers (starting with investment providers), so my library of statements may yet be needed for future movements of funds between financial accounts.

Enzo_L

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938272#Comment_81938272

I've vastly reduced my savings accounts in anticipation of this issue. All my regular savers have gone in the last year, and I had about 25 at one stage. It would just be too onerous and pointless to maybe have to provide statements for all of them, plus my other financial stuff.

But to the regulators, "activity not related to the funds" isn't a distraction, it is a "red flag" that the solicitor ignores at his or her peril.

I remember when life used to be simple …….

masonic

Yes, a clear example of legislation "wishing" things into being without working out the details or providing clear guidance and mechanisms for compliance. End result is a headache for those involved in legitimate transactions. But now we are really getting off topic, so I shall leave it at that!

flaneurs_lobster

Can I assume that this entire conversation is to do with providing the source of funds when buying a property using the services of a solicitor?

Because it's not at all obvious from the title or first post.

Any other situations when this proof might be needed?

masonic

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938349#Comment_81938349

Yes, it was related to conveyancing. However, there have been a couple of other threads outlining that similar processes are being rolled out to investment providers and potentially even savings. Dunstonh mentioned that he has seen this happening over the last year or two, so it is something to be generally aware of.

Edit: I've gone back and edited my "first post" that was split out to add some of the context back in and hopefully make this system-created thread make more sense!

Dizzycap

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938355#Comment_81938355

Trading212 were on my case 2 years ago regarding source of funds for my S&S ISA after transfer in. It was a real faff at the solicitors proving financial compliancy that would satisfy them, but it got sorted in the end. However, now funds are being transfered out again and I've had to declare that the funds being transferred "are not intended for any illegitimate purposes, such as financing ter*orism". So it's gone one step further for investments / investment vehicles.

I've yet to get a pull with regards to savings and RS accounts, but thankfully I've already covered my back with those as a part of the original Trading212 faff around.

1spiral

I posted a couple of weeks back in one of the threads that was subsequently removed that we had an awful time trying to provide source of funds for a house purchase.

About half of the funds had come from an inheritance, the remainder were lifetime savings. The conveyancer dealing with our case was clearly unqualified to deal with it and was constantly referring the case for additional opinions. Our searches and questions were all completed in about 7 weeks. At that point they moved on to AML checks. These took a further 6 weeks and 4 or 5 bouts of additional questions.

In the end we had provided over 80 documents and spent a total of 30 hours pulling the information together which entailed going back around 2 years worth of transaction history for most accounts.

One particular gripe that I have is that the institutions don't always use a meaningful description when transferring funds. Monument for example just use your name so it becomes a bit more problematic to trace funds whereas if it said my name and Monument, it would be a bit more helpful and therefore easier for the conveyancer to follow the funds.

masonic

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938459#Comment_81938459

"It was a real faff at the solicitors proving financial compliancy that would satisfy them"

The above has me a little confused. Hopefully this was something specific to your case and Trading212 doesn't ordinarily drive people to a solicitor when obtaining documentation for funds from an inward ISA transfer! 😨

clairec666

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938214#Comment_81938214

Thanks for the backup, I thought the "ignorant" comment was a bit unfair. Most of us have no idea what a solicitor's job entails, but are often frustrated by our dealings with them and need to vent some frustration from time to time.