Money Laundering and Customer Due Diligence

taato

I am having a bit of a standoff with my bank at the moment. I have been a customer for 17 years and have mortgage, life assurance, current account and various loans in the past with them. In line with Criminal Justice act I supplied photo ID a number of years ago and copies were taken. I am well known to local branch staff and have been at the same address all along.

I recently made an application for a credit card to my bank online and the entire procedure has been a farce from start to finish. Having sorted some details via the very helpful local branch and having signed all relevant paperwork - they then came back to me and said that they require current photo ID and proof of address!!! (mortgage!!! life assurance!!! 17 years statements!!!). I phoned and they insisted that because this was 'a new product' that I had to supply these documents in line with the Criminal Justice Act (2010). They kept quoting the act in all subsequent phonecalls so I decided to read it. Under the Customer due diligence bit it says that I must satisfy them as to my identity but it mentions documents OR information ....... The branch staff have confirmed my ID and address and sent a copy of my (now expired) passport but this is not good enough for anothe part of the same organisation. They seem to be mixing up internal guidlines with the legislation. Although my new passport has a newer photo and a different passport number - the bio details remain the same, name - date of birth - place of birth. As far as I am concerned - 'identity' doesn't change when a document expires and they should be satisfied with information they already have about me.

Just wondering why they are being so stubborn about this? Am I misinterpreting the legislation? Even better, does anyone have any legal definition of 'identity' in relation to these matters? I guess I'm just being stubborn about this but I am sick and tired of having to estabilsh my identity over and over with the same organisation. Has anyone any opinions on this?

DublinWriter

I think that they're taking the legislation a bit too far. The whole gist of AML legislation is 'know your customer'. Given your 17 year history, this is a bit too much.

fleet

You're being stubborn.

Their internal processes must meet or exceed the legal minimum required.

I could understand a degree of reluctance with an institution if lesser standing (wrt privacy etc), but these guys already know what you had for breakfast. You may as well give them the same info again and save yourself the headache.

All about choosing your battles :-)

hullaballoo

I agree with the general sentiment of the above post, it is about choosing your battles.

However, the manner in which established banks are treating customers of long standing and in particular those who have generally had a good/perfect credit history is nothing short of a disgrace.

It seems that the political pressures and the meeja portrayal of those in neg. eq./mortgage arrears as victims means that the banks have to pussy-foot around people who can't-won't pay their debts. In the meantime, those who have managed their finances well throughout the years aren't getting the benefit of the doubt no matter what.

It's like there's a quota of leniency available to the banks that's being taken up in its totality by the poor souls who were able to take out a €1m loan facility on a promise a few years ago.

My point is that there is a level of customer service that you should be entitled to expect. I would be ringing up my local branch and formally lodging a complaint, taking excerpts from the first reply in this thread. Bring up the fact that the regular terms of banking have been substantially unilaterally altered without complaint by you (if this applies) in the past few years - e.g. transaction fees etc.

Or, just give them this information, which is much easier albeit far less satisfying.

Thus ends my Friday rant.

NoQuarter

Hope you read the 2013 amendments too.

No Pants

Cancel the credit card application and get one somewhere else. Move your bank account also.

taato

DublinWriter wrote: »

I think that they're taking the legislation a bit too far. The whole gist of AML legislation is 'know your customer'. Given your 17 year history, this is a bit too much.

That is sort of what I thought the idea behind the legislation was. I'm no expert though.

taato

fleet wrote: »

You're being stubborn.

Their internal processes must meet or exceed the legal minimum required.

I could understand a degree of reluctance with an institution if lesser standing (wrt privacy etc), but these guys already know what you had for breakfast. You may as well give them the same info again and save yourself the headache.

All about choosing your battles :-)

You're right i am being stubborn and I suppose I should just do as they want. its just I'm so tired of financial institutions twisting legislation when it suits. Back a few years ago the same bank gave me a loan over the phone for nearly 20k. I think my credit rating is excellent, never late with a payment, never go into overdraft, mortgage always on time....I just feel like I am being treated as if I dropped out of the sky and they have no idea who I am.

taato

hullaballoo wrote: »

I agree with the general sentiment of the above post, it is about choosing your battles.

However, the manner in which established banks are treating customers of long standing and in particular those who have generally had a good/perfect credit history is nothing short of a disgrace.

It seems that the political pressures and the meeja portrayal of those in neg. eq./mortgage arrears as victims means that the banks have to pussy-foot around people who can't-won't pay their debts. In the meantime, those who have managed their finances well throughout the years aren't getting the benefit of the doubt no matter what.

It's like there's a quota of leniency available to the banks that's being taken up in its totality by the poor souls who were able to take out a €1m loan facility on a promise a few years ago.

My point is that there is a level of customer service that you should be entitled to expect. I would be ringing up my local branch and formally lodging a complaint, taking excerpts from the first reply in this thread. Bring up the fact that the regular terms of banking have been substantially unilaterally altered without complaint by you (if this applies) in the past few years - e.g. transaction fees etc.

Or, just give them this information, which is much easier albeit far less satisfying.

Thus ends my Friday rant.

Thanks for taking my point on board. I will escalate this 'customer complaint'. The branch staff have tried their best to communicate with the credit card section but they're not having a bar of it.......I'm 'new' business apparently, even after 17 years.

taato

NoQuarter wrote: »

Hope you read the 2013 amendments too.

To be honest I haven't read it yet, is there anything that would indicate that that identity needs to be authenticated frequently with the same organization?

sopretty

They've probably been recently audited. Had the torture of not having complied with this legislation in a company I worked in last year. We were told the same thing the year before, but we didn't do anything about it.
They seem to be cracking down now and requesting a specific sort of 'Evidence of compliance with AML Act' file these days.

You won't get around it. To be honest, it's a feckin pain in the ass for companies too.

taato

No Pants wrote: »

Cancel the credit card application and get one somewhere else. Move your bank account also.

Thats probably what I will end up doing. I'll be looking around with a view to moving some of my other banking products too, they haven't shown much loyalty to me so I don't feel I owe them any either.

lotmc

Failure to comply with the new legislation exposes bank staff to being personally prosecuted and incurring a fine, a criminal conviction and a jail sentence. That's the law.

Dont be surprised if they seek ID - it is the best way of ensuring that they dont go to jail.

taato

lotmc wrote: »

Failure to comply with the new legislation exposes bank staff to being personally prosecuted and incurring a fine, a criminal conviction and a jail sentence. That's the law.

Dont be surprised if they seek ID - it is the best way of ensuring that they dont go to jail.

Thanks for your reply. I certainly wouldn't want anyone prosecuted for non compliance on my behalf but I just don't see how I'm I'm not in compliance? I guess from my point of view they are taking a very narrow view of 'proof' or 'evidence' of identity. They have a copy of my previous passport......my identity hasn't changed. It's just a point of principle. I really don't think this sort of nonsense is what the legislation was brought in to address. Am I totally wrong?

sopretty

taato wrote: »

Thanks for your reply. I certainly wouldn't want anyone prosecuted for non compliance on my behalf but I just don't see how I'm I'm not in compliance? I guess from my point of view they are taking a very narrow view of 'proof' or 'evidence' of identity. They have a copy of my previous passport......my identity hasn't changed. It's just a point of principle. I really don't think this sort of nonsense is what the legislation was brought in to address. Am I totally wrong?

Not sure if you missed my post #11.
Believe me, we don't want to be chasing this crap up.
It's likely that it's a different division of the bank - so they will need to put you through the motions again.
Honestly, they're not being arseholes for the sake of it.

THE S33K3R

Save yourself the grief and get them what they want. It's the same for all financial institutions.

You can get your own back by paying the full amount owed every billing cycle and never get cash back on purchases thereby gaining free credit. You have to pay the stamp duty each year but that's the governments tariff.

taato

sopretty wrote: »

Not sure if you missed my post #11.
Believe me, we don't want to be chasing this crap up.
It's likely that it's a different division of the bank - so they will need to put you through the motions again.
Honestly, they're not being arseholes for the sake of it.

I know the staff are just following the rules and its not their fault, but I think the 'rules' are missing the point of the legislation. Does the AML legislation require different parts of the same organization to repeatedly verify the identity of their longstanding customers? And if so for what purpose?

sopretty

taato wrote: »

I know the staff are just following the rules and its not their fault, but I think the 'rules' are missing the point of the legislation. Does the AML legislation require different parts of the same organization to repeatedly verify the identity of their longstanding customers? And if so for what purpose?

Don't ask me! Lol.
Different divisions though probably can't just request a transfer of data from another division. Confidentiality lol.
Just bring in your passport and a bill or a bank statement. Save everyone a few minutes of stress!

Sheldons Brain

sopretty wrote: »

Don't ask me! Lol.
Different divisions though probably can't just request a transfer of data from another division. Confidentiality lol.

The OP can consent to passing on his details.

Just bring in your passport and a bill or a bank statement. Save everyone a few minutes of stress!

Don't pander to jobsworths.

taato

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

The OP can consent to passing on his details.

The branch did pass on a copy of my expired passport with my full consent and the branch staff confirmed they know me as a longstanding customer with several 'products'........means nothing apparently😤

Don't pander to jobsworths.

LOL if I'm going to pander to jobsworths....they might as well be in a different bank where they genuinely do need to authenticate my identity.

taato

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

The OP can consent to passing on his details.



Don't pander to jobsworths.

The local branch did pass on their file copy of my expired passport with my full consent AND the staff assured them that I am a longstanding customer with various 'products'.....means nothing apparently!

LOL...if I'm going to pander to jobsworths.....at least they should be from a different bank where they genuinely do need to verify my identity from scratch!

sopretty

Go for it then!

TherapyBoy

taato wrote: »

They have a copy of my previous passport......my identity hasn't changed.

Is it possible to get the bank to provide you with a copy of your previously presented ID papers & hand that into the credit card department?

I understand why they want to have this information but if the ID you gave them was good enough once, it should be good enough every time.

No Pants

TherapyBoy wrote: »

Is it possible to get the bank to provide you with a copy of your previously presented ID papers & hand that into the credit card department?

Not for free.

seagull

taato wrote: »

Thanks for taking my point on board. I will escalate this 'customer complaint'. The branch staff have tried their best to communicate with the credit card section but they're not having a bar of it.......I'm 'new' business apparently, even after 17 years.

In many banks, card division is quite separate from the rest. I know I went into the branch to change my address, and was told I would have to contact card division separately to have the address changed there.

johnnyskeleton

taato wrote: »

To be honest I haven't read it yet, is there anything that would indicate that that identity needs to be authenticated frequently with the same organization?

The 2010 on one reading certainly seems to suggest so, and it's not just the ops bank that thinks so:

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2010/en/act/pub/0006/sec0033.html#sec33

johnnyskeleton

TherapyBoy wrote: »

Is it possible to get the bank to provide you with a copy of your previously presented ID papers & hand that into the credit card department?

I understand why they want to have this information but if the ID you gave them was good enough once, it should be good enough every time.

But what if I go in posing as a relative and open an account in their name?

TherapyBoy

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

But what if I go in posing as a relative and open an account in their name?

I don't understand what you mean.

If the bank has copies of my photo ID to do with my mortgage, and is asking for copies of my ID for credit card application, can I ask for them to produce the copies of ID to do with my mortgage so that I can present them to the credit card department.
Someone answered me already, said they'd probably be looking for a fee to produce the information.

taato

TherapyBoy wrote: »

I don't understand what you mean.

If the bank has copies of my photo ID to do with my mortgage, and is asking for copies of my ID for credit card application, can I ask for them to produce the copies of ID to do with my mortgage so that I can present them to the credit card department.
Someone answered me already, said they'd probably be looking for a fee to produce the information.

Just to clarify - the bank already sent a copy of the ID to the credit card section and they wouldn't accept it because it was out of date!!!

What has the validity of the document got to do with authenticating the customer identity? Just a newer photo?

I suppose what I'm asking is - why does the CC section of the bank stick rigidly to just accepting specific items when the same level of authentication can be achieved by accepting the expired ones and information already within the organisation?

TherapyBoy

It is weird. Even if the ID was out of date it's still you!

It sounds like the credit card department are just being a bit awkward & pedantic. A little common sense would go a long way in situations like this.