HSBC Business Banking ****tards
Discussion
sidicks said:
They weren't 'facilitating' money laundering either.
Yes they were - because they didn't have the controls in place to make it more difficult. That's why they're being a pain in the arse now over identity checks. We've had two levels of it, and at one point they suggested they would need to see our all director/owners face-to-face but they backed off from that.https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&a...
Seems they have a bit of previous (from five years ago}
Quick off the mark or what!
Seems they have a bit of previous (from five years ago}
Quick off the mark or what!
55palfers said:
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&a...
Seems they have a bit of previous (from five years ago}
Quick off the mark or what!
That article suggests both active participation in and facilitation of money laundering to the tune of 100's of millions of dollars. High level serious and organised crime in other words. Seems they have a bit of previous (from five years ago}
Quick off the mark or what!
Why no-one gets gaoled for these japes is surprising to any but the most cynical.
Sheepshanks said:
Yes they were - because they didn't have the controls in place to make it more difficult. That's why they're being a pain in the arse now over identity checks. We've had two levels of it, and at one point they suggested they would need to see our all director/owners face-to-face but they backed off from that.
Failing to maintain adequate controls to prevent money laundering isn't legally the same as facilitating money laundering.My understanding is that 'facilitating' requires someone to have actively done something to aide someone else to launder money.
Edited by sidicks on Friday 1st September 09:26
drainbrain said:
That article suggests both active participation in and facilitation of money laundering to the tune of 100's of millions of dollars. High level serious and organised crime in other words.
Why no-one gets gaoled for these japes is surprising to any but the most cynical.
Presumably because no criminal offence has taken place.Why no-one gets gaoled for these japes is surprising to any but the most cynical.
PurpleMoonlight said:
TEKNOPUG said:
Because it takes 10mins to open an account, not 10days. And I want a bank transfer.
So you have deliberately opened an account that you know that you cannot bank the HSBC cheque into?
Try Metro Bank, you can do it online very quickly.
I have had similar issues with HSBC. My business has used a different bank for many years now but we still have an HSBC account that I found out my finance director had put £250k in for a reason, but not a particularly good one. I asked him to move this money to our other account and HSBC said they had a daily limit of £90k!!!
So I am having to wait 3 days to get hold of MY money from the gits! AML doesn't cut it here because both accounts are exactly the same name/company.
They also called me earlier this year to say I had not used my current account with them for a year. I told them I knew that and would not be using it again either. They said I should close it and I agreed and said let's do it. They then told me I had to go into a branch to do this. I said no, that is too much hassle now you have closed every branch local to me.
They said I had to and I asked what would happen if I didn't. They said in six months they would automatically close it for me!
So they can close it, but only when THEY want to. Absolute morons.
I have had similar issues with HSBC. My business has used a different bank for many years now but we still have an HSBC account that I found out my finance director had put £250k in for a reason, but not a particularly good one. I asked him to move this money to our other account and HSBC said they had a daily limit of £90k!!!
So I am having to wait 3 days to get hold of MY money from the gits! AML doesn't cut it here because both accounts are exactly the same name/company.
They also called me earlier this year to say I had not used my current account with them for a year. I told them I knew that and would not be using it again either. They said I should close it and I agreed and said let's do it. They then told me I had to go into a branch to do this. I said no, that is too much hassle now you have closed every branch local to me.
They said I had to and I asked what would happen if I didn't. They said in six months they would automatically close it for me!
So they can close it, but only when THEY want to. Absolute morons.
PurpleMoonlight said:
They bounced a cheque on me last week because the payee was written in two different coloured pens.
I don't think they're allowed to do that. As long as all the information such as amount in words & figures, signatures, date and payee they should honour the cheque. Probably an inexperienced 'monkey' at the branch. I would take it back.C Lee Farquar said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
They bounced a cheque on me last week because the payee was written in two different coloured pens.
I had a customer's cheque bounce because of this also.I had this a few times in my younger years when I used to have my wages paid by cheque and my name would be written incorrectly. Any amendments had to have the signature against it otherwise the cheque would be rejected at the bank.
Saw this shared on social media earlier https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s...
Might be of interest:
https://medium.com/@photonstorm/hsbc-is-killing-my...
HSBC's just a n other dying elephant.
https://medium.com/@photonstorm/hsbc-is-killing-my...
HSBC's just a n other dying elephant.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff