The thing is if someone created a new account to bypass the ban, the ban was probably justified in the first place.
- This is why I still think it was the best thing Starling ever did closing the community. How can a bank reasonably respond to this?? - It’s difficult as you don’t know the ins and outs of the situation.
They’ll just close it, which can annoy people as well.
But we all know its AML/KYC and if not there then Facebook, Twitter or Trustpilot
It’s difficult as the high street banks have similar processes in place. However, with a fintech, their whole presence is online. Therefore, it seems to be they’re more prone to these sorts of posts.
It’s Monzo’s own fault for not doing proper credit checks etc, I never saw this with Starling tbh but then again I wasn’t really looking.
People did post these on the Starling forum but they where (quite rightly) removed very quickly
I rarely frequented the forum tbh so didn’t really see it.
I have noticed though there are hardly any complaints of account closures on trustpilot as Monzo
They were few and far between from what i recall, but that meant when it did happen it was a big thing. People who hadn’t already seen it happen semi regularly on the Monzo forum tended to give the posters the benefit of the doubt which meant it became an issue; if you dont know the background, someone getting their account frozen sso their house electricity is cut off and their babies unable to eat or whatever sob story is concerning so i often felt sorry for the mods who were obviously unable to tell it how it is.
The problem with new banks is sometimes there is no fraud, no real risk, but the banks triggers have swung into action. Once that has happened then it has to be investigated and that isn’t a quick process. Established banks have fraud controls in place that for the most part are accurate, so you don’t hear people complaining about account closures, because they are for the most part legitimate closures, and a criminal or someone that has done something wrong wouldn’t go posting about that all over the internet.
Monzo, Starling, Revolut and so on, have built the fraud controls from scratch, using certain information they are given that they have to abide by, its how the triggers are triggered that will be changed over time. Receiving a deposit from certain countries will automatically trigger something, the bigger banks though have a facility that refers and flags accounts without an account being closed or frozen. For example if you are an Iraqi national and you have an account with a high street bank, a trigger flag may be on your account, but it won’t trigger a closure or suspension. It will refer your account to a specific team. Monzo doesn’t have that data it doesn’t have that knowledge, its building its controls as it goes along.
I use Iran because its an excellent example, no restrictions in the EU are in place, however any bank that deals with Iran that has an American presence can face problems in the US, so if its one of the big banks they automatically refer to specific team in that bank. So with the new banks that want to expand to the US they have to also bear in mind the US and its stricter rules.
I know you guys never believe me, but I know a person whose bank account was frozen incorrectly as a consequence of aml or whatever flags. That person didn’t have a second account, and the consequences were dire. If I hadn’t borrowed him a substantial amount of money he literally wouldn’t have had food to eat for several weeks.
This experience makes me say that the UK’s AML and related laws and regulations are an utter disgrace which really shouldn’t exist in a country that’s supposed to be proud of its legal system, as it’s a situation where you are quite literally presumed guilty until you have been proven innocent (and effectively subject to extra judicial punishment). I cannot comprehend that the UK public is OK with this.
So how did he get out of it and how long did it take, what was the end result?
He got out of it by providing a mountain of documents. Took forever (I don’t remember how long exactly, but I think around 1 month). End result was an apology and a functioning account (and a couple of additional accounts with other banks)
So I just got a 7 day ban for suggesting that Monzo removing the locked pot feature was because they want to make a profit and don’t want to waste £100ks unlocking people’s pots. Was I out of line?
I think this thread is more suited for that particular discussion
[Edit: I had posted this because I thought we were in a different thread. Apologies. As Sam has since replied it doesn’t seem right to delete the post, so I’ll keep it as a reminder to think before I write in the future… ]
I thought that was this thread?
I think it’s a pretty reasonable comment. A more fair suggestion is probably because they make 0.75% from your balance but only 0.15% of your pot.
LOL. Who banned you?
I know who