uk HSBC imposes restrictions on large cash withdrawals

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

HSBC imposes restrictions on large cash withdrawals

 

Some HSBC customers have been prevented from withdrawing large amounts of cash because they could not provide evidence of why they wanted it, the BBC has learnt.

 

Listeners have told Radio 4's Money Box they were stopped from withdrawing amounts ranging from ?5,000 to ?10,000.

 

HSBC admitted it has not informed customers of the change in policy, which was implemented in November.

 

The bank says it has now changed its guidance to staff.

 

New rules

Stephen Cotton went to his local HSBC branch this month to withdraw ?7,000 from his instant access savings account to pay back a loan from his mother.

 

A year before, he had withdrawn a larger sum in cash from HSBC without a problem.

 

But this time it was different, as he told Money Box: "When we presented them with the withdrawal slip, they declined to give us the money because we could not provide them with a satisfactory explanation for what the money was for. They wanted a letter from the person involved."

 

Mr Cotton says the staff refused to tell him how much he could have: "So I wrote out a few slips. I said, 'Can I have ?5,000?' They said no. I said, 'Can I have ?4,000?' They said no. And then I wrote one out for ?3,000 and they said, 'OK, we'll give you that.' "

 

He asked if he could return later that day to withdraw another ?3,000, but he was told he could not do the same thing twice in one day.

 

He wrote to complain to HSBC about the new rules and also that he had not been informed of any change.

 

The bank said it did not have to tell him. "As this was not a change to the Terms and Conditions of your bank account, we had no need to pre-notify customers of the change," HSBC wrote.

 

Frustrated customers

Mr Cotton cannot understand HSBC's attitude: "I've been banking in that bank for 28 years. They all know me in there. You shouldn't have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It's not theirs, it's yours."

 

Peter from Wiltshire, who wanted his surname withheld, had a similar experience.

 

He wanted to take out ?10 000 cash from HSBC, some to pay to his sons and some to fund his long-haul travel plans.

Peter phoned up the day before to give HSBC notice and everything seemed to be fine.

 

The next day he got a call from his local branch asking him to pay his sons via a bank payment and to provide booking receipts for his holidays. Peter did not have any booking receipts to show.

 

The following day he spoke to HSBC again and this time, having examined his account, it said he could withdraw the ?10,000.

Belinda Bell is another customer who was initially denied her cash, in her case to pay her builder. She told Money Box she had to provide the builder's quote.

 

Customer protection

HSBC has said that following customer feedback, it was changing its policy: "We ask our customers about the purpose of large cash withdrawals when they are unusual and out of keeping with the normal running of their account. Since last November, in some instances we may have also asked these customers to show us evidence of what the cash is required for."

 

"The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced."

 

Money Box asked other banks what their policy is on large cash withdrawals.

 

They all said they reserved the right to ask questions about large cash withdrawals.

 

But none of them said they would require evidence of what the money was being used for before paying out.

 

Douglas Carswell, the Conservative MP for Clacton, is alarmed by the new HSBC policy: "All these regulations which have been imposed on banks allow enormous interpretation. It basically infantilises the customer. In a sense your money becomes pocket money and the bank becomes your parent."

 

But Eric Leenders, head of retail at the British Bankers Association, said banks were sensible to ask questions of their customers: "I can understand it's frustrating for customers. But if you are making the occasional large cash withdrawal, the bank wants to make sure it's the right way to make the payment."

 

Source: BBC News

[FloatingFatMan]

I can understand the security concerns, but at the end of the day, it's YOUR money; they have no right to refuse to dispense it.

 

However, I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect solid proof of ID (photo ID preferably), and for them to suggest alternative means of paying whatever they're paying off with it.  Carrying around large amounts of cash is not a clever idea, generally.

[Vykranth]

"The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced."

Given the fact that HSBC has paid $1.9B fines to avoid prosecution for money-laundering (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/11/us-hsbc-probe-idUSBRE8BA05M20121211), I find really phenomenal that they would use the 'financial crimes' so-called reasons.

[torrentthief]

This is the orwelian cashless society that the govt wants so they have electronic records of everything you buy and sell.

[Brian M. Veteran]

It's getting a bit silly now tbh.

If you've proved who you are, and they don't suspect money laundering, then they have no right to refuse you access to your cash, providing you give them enough notice.

And they suggest bank transfers as an alternative? That's fine if both accounts are faster payments enabled, otherwise you're still waiting 5 days, with neither party (conveniently) earning interest in that time.

[streetw0lf]

I'm going on holiday with my Mistress and need money for some coke.  Good enough reason? ;-)

[Torolol]

iirc i was so irked about HSBC and close my account there and move the money to another bank, thats happened in 2004,

though i'm not quite remember what about HSBC that irks me at that time.

but one thing sure, i'm not regretting my decisions.

[jakem1]

It's getting a bit silly now tbh.

If you've proved who you are, and they don't suspect money laundering, then they have no right to refuse you access to your cash, providing you give them enough notice.

And they suggest bank transfers as an alternative? That's fine if both accounts are faster payments enabled, otherwise you're still waiting 5 days, with neither party (conveniently) earning interest in that time.

All banks/branches now support faster payments (the majority have done for years).

[Anibal P]

I sometimes pay my rent by depositing cash into my Landlord's business account, the account is at a Chase Bank, was just told that after Feb 1 that only account holders or named people on the account can pay in cash, everything else has to be checks, which I don't have because useless.

[Dick Montage]

"Oh I'm sorry, I thought you said you would not give me my money.  Can I please get that in writing?"

[_dandy_]

Reading the headline, I thought this had to do with redrawals at an ATM or some such--no big deal, my bank does the same, and I'd be rather ###### if there was no restriction.

 

But in person, with ID?  Yeah, that's where, if they won't give me access to my money, it's gonna get transferred to another bank.  What I do with my money is none of their goddamned business.  This isn't a loan.

 

While they can make suggestions for more efficient money transfers, they shouldn't be allowed to refuse someone access to his/her money.

[McKay]

In that situation I'd laugh, then with a straight face inform the cashier I'm closing all my accounts and changing banks, and to give me all my money, now. It's so easy to change banks nowadays, the new bank even sorts it all out for you.

[FlintyV]

?It is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal,? the bank said in a statement. ?We apologize to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced.?

 

Storm in a teacup has passed.

[Lord Method Man]

Simple reason: "Because it's mine and not yours."

[123456789A]

I can understand the security concerns, but at the end of the day, it's YOUR money; they have no right to refuse to dispense it.

 

However, I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect solid proof of ID (photo ID preferably), and for them to suggest alternative means of paying whatever they're paying off with it.  Carrying around large amounts of cash is not a clever idea, generally.

 

He should have done this instead.

 

[kronckew]

it's NOT your money. it's the government's, they allow you to use it on sufference and will do their best to ensure you keep as little as possible of it.

those welfare handouts do not pay for themselves, you know, let alone all the overseas aid we are forced to contribute to.

 

add up the income tax, value added tax, fuel tax, national insurance tax, stamp tax, alchohol tax, cigarette tax, business tax, rates, property tax, council tax, inheritance tax, and a few i probably forgeot to include and you are lucky to have anything left to live on. especially when government agencies, funded by our taxes, also charge us a bribe 'fee' to get them to do anything; so also add in license fees, filing fees, registration fees, passport fees, visa fees, fe fees, and so forth.  also musn't forget fines, air tax and water tax, the 'green' taxes, etc. etc. that are passed on to us thru taxes charged to firms that supply stuff to us at inflated prices.

[Guest]

bitcoin anyone?

[FlintyV]

bitcoin anyone?

 

That's utterly useless if you're not buying things from the tiny amount of sites which support it.