HSBC imposes restrictions on large cash withdrawals

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by stg58, Jan 25, 2014.

  1. stg58

    stg58 Monkey+++ Founding Member

    barry would love to say YOU can't have YOUR money, he is doing now in many ways with obamacare..

    "prevented from withdrawing large amounts of cash because they could not provide evidence of why they wanted it wanted it"
    BBC News - 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    A year before, he had withdrawn a larger sum in cash from HSBC without a problem.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."
  2. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    "In that case, close my account and give it to me in cash, now. And I will deal with a less nosey bank instead.";)
  3. limpingbear

    limpingbear future cancer survivor....

    This has to be in Europe or somewhere like that.....that would not fly here. Now I have gotten guff from my bank for making large cash withdrawls and not giving them a heads up so they could make sure to have the cash on hand, but I have never been told no by my bank.
  4. BTPost

    BTPost Stumpy Old Fart,Deadman Walking, Snow Monkey Moderator

    In the US, Banks come in different varieties. A National Bank is Federally Chartered, and must obey the Federal Banking Statutes. One of those Statutes says that ANY Transaction above $10KUS must be reported to Comptroller of Currency, who controls those Federal Charters. For State Banks, it depends on the State Banking Statutes. For Federal Savings and Loans, there is a Federal Administration who's Statutes cover their operations. It is the same with Credit Unions.

    If I walked into my Bank, and they refused to allow me to withdraw, any amount that was less, than what I had on Deposit, I would call 911, and have the Manager arrested for Theft, or at least file an Official Complaint, of Grand a Theft, with the local Cops. Then I would call the local Tv News Station, and let them know, that there was an issue, with this BANK. After that I would eMail the Administrator of their Charter, and file an Official Complaint, with them....

    One other thing, I would NEVER withdraw, more that $2KUS in cash. I would Always move funds, that exceeded that amount, by Direct Wire Transfer, from my Bank, to their Bank. To much can happen to you between withdraw and cash Transfer, to the Payee. ......
  5. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Given that the complaint was because the withdrawal was in Pounds, I'd venture it was a British transaction. They are strange folks sometimes.

    I can also understand that any given bank would want a heads up for a "large" takeout. Having dealt with moving some fairly substantial quantities of bux around from there to here, I did it piecemeal (with paper checks) to avoid the reporting requirements. Went smoothly --
    Yard Dart likes this.
  6. VHestin

    VHestin Farm Chick

    Yeah well I'm pretty sure it's because the banks don't wanna give away their money, because don't we know that once it's in their hands, it's their money, not ours? Just like the Feds...
  7. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Founding Member

    Look at South Cyprus last year. The government came in and seized up to 18% of peoples money in the banks. Originally it was going to be everyone until protests and riots forced them to change it to only accounts with over $100k, then that was ok if it was only "the rich". They put a ban on all withdrawals for almost two weeks to prevent runs on the banks and still they have a $5000 a month maximum withdrawal for all accounts.
    tulianr likes this.
  8. Yard Dart

    Yard Dart Vigilant Monkey Moderator

    I guess you would have to leave large cash amounts in the bank to be concerned with this. I am married so my likely hood of ever falling into this category is doubtfull..... :rolleyes: But if I ever did secure enough to be an issue, it would never go in a bank........ but converted into something we may say is a bit safer.....[winkthumb]
  9. stg58

    stg58 Monkey+++ Founding Member

    It appears they have backed off a bit.
    Banking regs and charters are one thing getting a local LEO to enforce them is completely different.
    We have seen time and time again the power of the presidential pen...

    A theoretical presidential statement on a executive order.

    I am blocking customers from making large withdrawals without “evidence” explaining why they need the money from their accounts.
    "The reason being we have an obligation to protect our citizens, and to minimize the opportunity for financial crime,”

    Prove it: Bank blocking some customers from making large withdrawals without ‘evidence’ of spending need | The Sideshow - Yahoo News

    If you bank at HSBC in England, don’t plan on making any large cash withdrawals. At least not without a good explanation. Or, maybe even a permission slip.

    That’s because a previously unannounced change in banking policy is blocking some customers from making large withdrawals without “evidence” explaining why they need the money from their accounts .

    The policy affects customers attempting withdrawals for amounts as little as £5,000 ($8,253).

    HSBC says it’s all done in the name of customer protection.

    "The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimize the opportunity for financial crime,” HSBC said in a statement. “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 apologize to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced."
  10. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    :lol: They realized there was going to be a mass withdrawal coming to their branches soon --
    gunbunny and kellory like this.
  11. Nukashima

    Nukashima Monkey

    The London Banks are now being allowed to credit their future estimated earnings as assets now. That's how 'illiquid' the system is. There are a few exceptions around the world where banks maintain 25% in liquidity at all times. Norway, Hong Kong, Singapore and a few others. Look for Cyprus II and bank holidays coming to a branch near you. Hope you are all aware that Congress passed a law that states that all customer money held in U.S. banks is considered part of the bank's assets, so when bankruptcy happens, creditors and not customers will get first dibs at their money.
  12. VHestin

    VHestin Farm Chick

    We don't keep much money in the bank. Take as much out as we can at the ATM, then the rest we just get cash back at local stores.
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary