to want to close my bank account after this gross invasion of privacy?

[somanymiles]

I went to get cash out of my bank account this morning to pay the builders (£6,000) and was told I could not take that amount out without hard copy proof of what I was spending the money on eg an invoice. I was given no notice of this so of course did not have anything except a quote on my phone which they did not accept, even though I offered to email it to them. This was not a question of confirming my identity- it was that they have a new policy where you gave to prove what you are spending your cash on. When I asked what the threshold was for the new policy I was told they were not allowed to tell me. I am furious. Surely what I spend my money on us nobodies business but mine. It certainly isn't HSBC's business.I am thinking of closing my accounts there with all the hassle that will entail. AIBU?

Correct.

It is amazing how zealous the most dodgy banks are with their small customers, while bending over backwards for oligarchs of dubious origin.

Many people do like to use cash. Sure, it is a minority, but not an insignificant minority and, in general, probably they constitute richer rather than poorer customers.

I don't agree that a significant proportion of people prefer to use cash for expensive items/services. Surely anyone with any sense would prefer to pay with visa debit/bank transfer etc rather than walk around with thousands of pounds in their pockets?

Because a bank's policy doesn't necessarily mean the applicable regulations but can often be an interpretation of those regulations. And if you have a bank which, perhaps because it corrupted itself, is being over-zealous in stamping out often imaginary money laundering, customers will walk away.

Okay maybe not all of them will have exactly the same policy but I bet a lot of them will have similar policies now. You can hardly ask when opening the account what their policies are regarding withdrawal of large sums of cash.

Same thing happened to me, i needed to get an invoice for 10k in cash, it is obviously for money laundering but they should be checking the money going in, not going out. i threatened to close my account but they didn't give in and still wouldn't give me the cash without a letter or an invoice, so i closed the account. i opened a new one with Halifax and explained what had just happened and they laughed and couldn't believe what they were doing, saying it was my money and i could do what i wanted with with it. i had a six digit bank balance and HSBC didn't even call to try and keep me as a customer, or why i had closed the account, that's how much they respect your custom. To get the 10k i just transferred 5k to a friend who withdrew that and i withdrew the other 5k, a pain in the arse but it worked. They don't mind 5k but i think 10k sets alarm bells. I'd say close the account and go somewhere else, just as i did.

we have started taking cash out of our account and using it on a daily basis rather than using a DC - fed up of the monitoring on what you do on a daily basis, where you spend etc. etc.

larrygrylls I think your correct in that HSBC don't seem to have the same standards throughout their own branches when it comes to the rules as I seem to have been treated differently to others commenting on here.

as for internet banking - dont make me laugh - when they make it safe I will consider using it however that's a long way off yet. I work in the IT industry within banking and have a connection to 8 out of 10 banks in this country and you would be astonished if you knew some of the things I do that goes on behind the scenes in some/most of our banks.

ummm if she is taking from the bank then the origins can be traced so not subject to ML regulations... If she was paying in huge amounts then they may want to check that but not if she is taking it out surely...

sadandlonely withdrawing £6,000 in cash is for the purposes of ml/poc an unusual transaction. The cashier is obliged to ask. There is no reason for paying builders in cash. There may have been a valid reason but the obvious one is this was a cash in hand payment not going through the builders' books.

A few people on here seem to think that's only for the builders ' conscience, it isn't.

You keep stating this, Caitlin, with zero evidence to support it and despite being contradicted by many experts in this thread.

ummm if she is taking from the bank then the origins can be traced so not subject to ML regulations...

Of course it's subject to money laundering regulations! Why wouldn't it be?

You should tell them you want to put it on a horse. Banks are a joke, really. Couldn't you get the amount in a cheque to give to the builder? Cash does sound dodgy.

Princess,

The point of money laundering is to stop dirty money (normally in the form of cash, or in an account in a dubious jurisdiction) from getting in to a bank account in a mainstream bank, at which point the criminal can do what they like with it.

If the money is already in an account in a mainstream bank, then it has been deemed by that bank to be clean. Thus, taking it out is not subject to the ML regulations. In fact, as I pointed out upthread, withdrawing cash is the opposite of what a money launderer wants to achieve.

Larry,

I'm well aware of the anti money laundering legislation and it is to do with withdrawals as well.

Thanks for your input though.

If you want to win that point why don't you use a reference to a regulation rather than passive-aggression?

Not interested in 'winning a point'

What on earth is the problem in paying cash stage payments to tradespeople? I don't understand that at all. Some people prefer to hand over cash, often because it is convenient to them. Not everybody is crooked!

My Husband is self employed. He is often paid cash but the transaction is recorded in the same manner as bank payments.

Reputable builders don't ask to be paid £6k in cash.

However, rogues who prey on the uninformed and vulnerable do.

However some uniformed and vulnerable people won't listen so I suppose they are free to chuck their money down the drain if they want to.

It was about 5 years ago now but I went through a spate of withdrawing large sums of cash from the local Barclays.

I had to take lots of ID which is fine obv, and they asked what I wanted it for - I just said building work - and it was fine.

Having to show multiple pieces of evidence before they will allow you to withdraw your own money is preposterous.

OP I think you should change your bank.

Err.....The original post doesn't say anything about being asked to pay cash.

And BTW my Husband is a reputable builder and he is often paid cash by (possibly) disreputable customers.

Do NOT make the assumption that cash transactions = trashy conmen.

And maybe the reason vulnerable people 'don't listen' is because they are, um, vulnerable.

There is zero point in complaining by the way, banks are protected against customer impact in the course of their compliance with AML Regulations as long as the bank acts reasonably. In this case Hsbc will say that the transaction was unusual for you and therefore potentially suspicious.

Over-zealous application of legislation, but all banks are under increasing scrutiny and have been protected by the Courts (eg recent case law Shah v HSBC).

Ah. I have had this happen to me on every occasion I've withdrawn a large quantity of cash (when we renovated our house, it was bi-weekly). Not proof but an explanation.

How do you "prove" what you're going to spend the money on? I'd feel invaded as well. What if your reason is that you prefer cash to a bank balance?

By the way, there is no de minimis limit on what amount of cash the cashier should ask questions about. Certain figures have been bandied about on this thread but for the purpose of AML monitoring these are wrong. Firms may work up a matrix of amounts unusual for a particular customer, or review all cash transactions over, say £10k, but if a cashier is suspicious then they must enquire after and possibly report ANY transaction regardless of value if they are suspicious. Not to be confused with mandatory reporting limits which are generally set to £10k, €10k etc - or customs limits on cash flight cross border.

In that cashier's shoes I would have asked for evidence too, but would have accepted the e-quote. Senior banking professional here.

When I was bought out of a mortgage they queried the cheque from the Solicitor and clearing was delayed for two weeks whilst they checked it out.

Thing is that every time the bank refuses to allow access to a customer's own money, they make money.

I am not inclined to believe that some banks won't exploit that fact.

I bet they had the cheque in one of their holding accounts though didn't they Mignonette, making money on it themselves, just not allowing you access to it.

This might all be in retaliation to the fact that they are having to do "faster transactions" now and can't make £££ on the black hole that money used to vanish into for a few days while it was "cleared". Electronic transactions have been instantaneous in other countries for yonks, our banks have held off as long as poss as it costs them.

Yes I imagine so Nice. .

Good point about the impact of faster transactions too.