The lunacy of UK banks

And how exactly does messing around with extra forms of ID and pissing off customers make the banks a profit ?

Cheers,

John

Why can't you just accept the account and not use the overdraft, card and cheque book ?

Cheers,

John

I am Irish, not American. For your information, this is a newsgroup not a board. Please learn to use the media you are attempting to use.

Axel

What's the harm in having a cheque book and overdraft if you don't plan to use them?

"Aztech" wrote in news:OZkRe.34140$ snipped-for-privacy@fe01.news.easynews.com:

Temptation?

GK

, and my ex bank said they couldn't back date their c*ck

Isn't that in breach of DPA?

GK

Richard,

To address both the anti-money laundering (AML) and fraud points:

(1) AML Under UK law there are five main offences relating to money laundering (with max penalties as shown), as follows: (a) assisting another to retain the benefits of criminal conduct (14 year prison term, fine or both) (b) acquiring, possessing or using the proceeds of criminal conduct (prison term, fine or both) (c) concealing or transferring the proceeds of criminal conduct (prison term, fine or both) (d) failure to report the knowledge or suspicion of money laundering (5 year prison term, fine or both) (e) tipping off (5 year prison term, fine or both)

Bank staff are at risk of committing (d) or (e) unless they follow their employers' very strict account opening guidelines _to the letter_. This is why opening an account these days can be so frustrating - the person you are dealing with is making a rational decision to limit their personal risk by slavishly following the rules. And who can blame them ?

(2) Fraud It might be worth thinking through the implications of this one, even though it does sound a little odd on first reading.

Let's imagine a couple of possible frauds on your account:

(1) Theft of instrument The fraudster obtains physical control of a financial instrument linked to the account (e.g. cash card, chequebook) and uses same to fradulently pay away funds.

(2) Address fraud The fraudster impersonates an authorised person in order to change the address held in the bank's records for a given account. He/she is then able to request new financial instruments and intercept them at the fraudulent address. He/she can also write to the bank requesting transfer of funds etc.

The difference between (1) and (2) is essentially a question of time. You're likely to report your card stolen within a few hours. However, you may not notice for months that you've had no bank statements. The lag greatly increase the chances of a successful fraud being perpetrated.

Also, bank staff don't like being shouted at by estranged partners so prefer to get two authorities for every change to a joint account !!!

Regards

Nick

But what I don't understand is why a utility bill is taken as some sort of gospel. When my wife couldn't get a bank account I wrote to two of my utility companies and instructed them to change the name on the accounts. This they did without question. I did wonder if I a had instructed them to insert the name M Mouse as the account holder whether they would have done so. Also there had been no verification by the utilities against me when I first staretd accounts so why are they used as positive id.

Kevin

wrote

Ermmm - doesn't emptying the account, "change" the balance on it?

Also it would be absolutely trivial to print your own "utility bill" if you were so inclined.

How does requiring the presentation of utility bills prevent the bank committing any of the above offenses? All they do is provide a reasonable assurance that you are who you say you are, and have at least some connection with the address on the bill. It doesn't tell them anything at all about the source of any funds you deposit with them.

Chris

In message , Chris Blunt writes

Money laundering rules have two areas of requirement :-

Maybe it will be an inducement during the proposed voluntary phase that the Blunkett card will be accepted both as proof of identity and of address, as it is in other European countries, but I expect that it will be much like the driving licence now that you will still need a utility bill or bank statement or whatever.

Btw, what is the legal situation if I forge, say, a utility bill showing my real address, and use it to open an account?

It is indeed ridiculous how easy it is to change details without further verification once you have opened the account.

One bank once managed to change my name on the account to something like KR5$GT, and it was quite a job to change it back. On another occasion it changed my address without my authority.

No comment. [Other than that utility bills can be forged - do they ever get followed up?]

Quite. But (1) does help indirectly with this, because unless you get funds credited to your account "out of the blue" or by accident and you don't have a clue where from, then the fact that they know who you are and where to get hold of you means that at least they can ask you. Quite what they think they can do if you refuse (or are innocently unable) to tell them, I wouldn't mind knowing...

Actually (1) doesnt help with this at all. If it wasnt for these loony rules the bank would be happy with whatever address you tell them from time to time with any evidence at all, so they would always be in touch with you.

Lets hope Uncle Tony's recent intervention brings some sense into the money laundering asylum.

In message , snipped-for-privacy@mwfree.net writes

IME they would have tried and instead it would have been changed to Mr D Duck

When I opened a bank account in London... I simply arranged for a second telephone line with a friend (I could not use the place where I was actually staying as it was a pub).

Axel

And if the person opening the account moves the next day?

Axel