Charter Savings Bank cash ISA account opening - not.

friolento

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82116941#Comment_82116941

I was talking about paper copies (which Charter appear to have asked for), not emailed PDFs.

To date, nobody has rejected my Starling statements on the grounds that Starling would not provide printed statements (or on any other grounds).

All that aside, there are a host of other documents from other banks that can be printed off and mailed to the recipient. For example , I could use my Halifax credit card statement, or my Lloyds current account statement, amongst others.

If emails of - allegedly - mailed statements / documents are asked for, print off the PDFs, scan them into a new PDF or JPEG/PNG, or make a photo of them.

As the saying goes: where there is a will……………………..

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82117063#Comment_82117063

I think this is getting a bit circular! I was simply pointing out that your home-printed Starling statement wouldn't comply with the stated requirements of the bank that this thread is about and then pointing out that 'certification' doesn't make such statements any more credible once printed, and likewise, they say that other home-printed documents aren't acceptable.

Other banks are of course free to impose their own policies and practically all will prefer electronic ID verification anyway, so pieces of paper should be the exception rather than the rule…

largeronald

At the end of the day, it's up to Charter Savings what unachievable conditions they impose on new customers. I strongly suspect they've recently fallen foul of some money laundering regulation or other and gone totally overboard in a knee-jerk reaction without thinking through the implications of what they're doing.

One of the reasons I chose Charter Savings was because of their recommended provider accreditation in Which? magazine. I wonder if they'll keep that once Which? find out how they behave when phoning people.

Money_Stitch

Charter opening

I opened an EA about three months ago and checks were electronic, no additional ID needed, so I don't think they've yet made the move for all new applications to require it.

I noticed Progressive states on their website that photo ID will be needed for all new registrations.

I encountered my first issue when registering with Cynergy. Same day as Charter. All went through ok, electronic checks. Only after I had funded it (fortunately only with £1) did they come back and ask for ID to be sent via a platform in California (or manual email), which I thought both sneeky and insecure to do after accepting my deposit. They also refused to send the £1 back to nominated account, even though it was within the cooling off period. Not impressed with Cynergy, yet many on this forum seem to be.

Have opened multiple other accounts ok, same circumstances, with just electronic checks. It does seem a bit inconsistent but it's likely we'll see more of it.

SacredStephan

Charter Savings have told me:
I can confirm that we can accept a paper driving licence for the Identity or Residency checks on the application.
We can only use the paper driving licence for one of the checks and an additional document will be needed for the other check.

largeronald

So they will accept a 26 year old driving licence as proof but not a current statement from the designated bank account. Incredible.

By the way, my wife received another voicemail yesterday at 17.00 asking her to contact Charter Savings. Turns out that having rejected my wife's application a week ago they wanted to check on the progress of the application.

When my wife asked them to return her P60 (which they are no longer entitled to hold) they replied that they would. So now they are going to send my wife's personal data to an address that they have stated categorically they aren't satisfied is hers. I'm pretty sure there's a breach of the Data Protection Act there somewhere.

You couldn't make it up.

eskbanker

So they will accept a 26 year old driving licence as proof but not a current statement from the designated bank account. Incredible.

It may seem incredible to you but the logic is clear, in terms of the actual comparison being made, in less loaded terms - the former is a formal government-issued document which by law must be returned and reissued when moving, i.e. regardless of its age, the address is assumed to be reliable.

Meanwhile, as covered already, they aren't the only ones to decline to accept home-printed bank statements (as these are too easily edited).

When my wife asked them to return her P60 (which they are no longer entitled to hold) they replied that they would. So now they are going to send my wife's personal data to an address that they have stated categorically they aren't satisfied is hers. I'm pretty sure there's a breach of the Data Protection Act there somewhere.

You couldn't make it up.

There's obviously a difference between not accepting various documents as proof of address, where these are outside their published policies, and categorically saying they're not satisfied she lives there, so how exactly was the latter sentiment expressed? In these circumstances (where she has decided not to proceed with her application due to inability to provide acceptable ID), how do you suggest they return the P60 which, as you rightly say, they're no longer entitled to hold?

largeronald

"the former is a formal government-issued document which by law must be returned and reissued when moving, i.e. regardless of its age, the address is assumed to be reliable."

So Charter Savings are assuming their clients to be lawful but not truthful? Not the basis of a successful business model for a financial institution I would suggest.

They have stated that her proofs of address are not acceptable. They cannot possibly then say that they are satisfied with the address she has provided. Either they believe her or they don't. If they don't, they're sending personal data to an unverified (according to their own criteria) address. I would expect them, when sending out personal data, to satisfy themselves that the address they're sending said data to is correct. Which they obviously haven't.

My wife didn't decide not to proceed with her application. The application was stopped.

eskbanker

"the former is a formal government-issued document which by law must be returned and reissued when moving, i.e. regardless of its age, the address is assumed to be reliable."

So Charter Savings are assuming their clients to be lawful but not truthful? Not the basis of a successful business model for a financial institution I would suggest.

That's just another strawman - they're simply publishing a list of documents which they're prepared to accept as evidencing ID, and these aren't materially different from the ID verification policies of other institutions (where electronic verification hasn't succeeded).

They have stated that her proofs of address are not acceptable. They cannot possibly then say that they are satisfied with the address she has provided. Either they believe her or they don't. If they don't, they're sending personal data to an unverified (according to their own criteria) address. I would expect them, when sending out personal data, to satisfy themselves that the address they're sending said data to is correct. Which they obviously haven't.

She failed to provide any of the documents they consider acceptable for account opening purposes so they're entirely within their rights not to proceed with the application (without accusing her of lying!), but again, having reached this point, what do you suggest they now do with the P60 document?

largeronald

I have said that it's up to Charter Savings who they accept. I suppose that whether their conditions for proving identity reflect what other similar institutions require and whether their conditions are considered reasonable is purely subjective.

Re. the P60, I expect them to do what I expect any institutions to do when sending out people's personal data - take reasonable steps to ensure that the recipient will be the person entitled to the data. Not an altogether unreasonable expectation in this day and age, I would have thought. By their own criteria, they have not as yet managed to do that. Electoral roll as a start? Two other financial institutions my wife has told Charter Savings she is a customer of?

But, thinking about it, if they did that, it would make them look pretty stupid, no?

Edit: The P60 is only with Charter Savings because they told my wife over the phone that it would be acceptable as proof. The problem of what to do with it is one ENTIRELY of their own making, and as such is one for them to sort out. If they have to send a courier with it personally, my wife will happily await them with passport in hand.