If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Customer: "Hi, I'd like to withdraw some money from my bank account please." Bank Teller: "Nope, unless you can tell us what it's for; and show us an itemized receipt or quote of expenses"   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 47
    More: Scary, HSBC, bank teller, bank accounts, cash withdrawals  
•       •       •

18930 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jan 2014 at 12:11 PM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-01-25 10:26:27 AM  
25 votes:
Customer: "I'll be closing my account please."
2014-01-25 11:42:16 AM  
9 votes:
"You haven't heard? I want to get my money out before the bank run starts. You do still have some cash left, don't you?"

Preferably spoken loudly during peak business hours.
2014-01-25 12:17:04 PM  
7 votes:
"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."

How about fark you, it's my money, I can make payments any way I choose.
2014-01-25 12:17:16 PM  
6 votes:
Isn't this the bank that was laundering money for terrorists?
2014-01-25 12:13:41 PM  
5 votes:

Speaker2Animals: "You shouldn't have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It's not theirs, it's yours."

LMAO if he really believes this.


He should believe this, because it's true.

The customer is allowed to close their account and take it elsewhere anytime they please.  More like "LMAO if the bank really believes this" (although it's 2014, so maybe not the LMAO part).

Just because you're willing to bend over and take it in the ass doesn't mean everyone else is.
2014-01-25 10:46:34 AM  
5 votes:

Demetrius: Customer: "I'll be closing my account please."


This.
2014-01-25 01:11:54 PM  
4 votes:

Malacon: I wish I could remember the details (it's been over a decade) but I want to say it was over $5k in cash or $10k in a bank check. It was a federal law, not a bank one, and was intended to keep tabs on possible money laundering or something...



Sounds like the Bank Secrecy Act. The thing is, the threshold has never been adjusted for inflation and there is no indication it will be in the foreseeable future. The limit introduced in 1970 is $10,000, equivalent to $60,000 today yet the threshold remains at $10k. By the time I'm old enough to retire I expect banks will be required to report when I withdraw cash to buy groceries. But the NSA will probably know about it before the the bank employees do.
2014-01-25 12:20:56 PM  
3 votes:
Here is a deposit slip for my new bank, the one down the street. Written on that slip is the amount of money I have in your bank, that will now be put into their bank. I'd like that in singles, please.

Itemized enough for you, baitch?
2014-01-25 12:17:37 PM  
3 votes:
I'm surprised banks in the US don't do this yet.

Mainly because attorneys have argued in court that if a bank doesn't try to stop Grandma from withdrawing her life savings and wiring it to her grandson in Costa Rica who got busted for DUI and lost his passport, well.....that's the banks fault and they need to reimburse Grandma.
2014-01-25 10:47:29 AM  
3 votes:

Demetrius: Customer: "I'll be closing my account please."


It does seem pretty ridiculous. Putting a hold on a large and out of character debit purchase makes sense as a customer protection measure, but I can't see how preventing a withdrawal when the account holder is there in person with ID improves security.

If they're worried about people with fake IDs trying to access accounts they could just require customers to set up security questions that they'd have to answer in the event of a large out of character withdrawal.
2014-01-25 01:07:23 PM  
2 votes:

IanMoone: I'm surprised banks in the US don't do this yet.


They do.

Mainly because attorneys have argued in court that if a bank doesn't try to stop Grandma from withdrawing her life savings and wiring it to her grandson in Costa Rica who got busted for DUI and lost his passport, well.....that's the banks fault and they need to reimburse Grandma.

Nope.

US banks are required by the Bank Secrecy Act (as amended by the PATRIOT Act) to submit all cash transactions over $10k to FinCEN, the Treasury Department's law enforcement agency.

No reporting requirement currently exists in the UK, but transactions over £10k will be subject to enhanced diligence by the bank.

In both cases, a refusal to comply with the additional diligence requirements will result in the bank (or other financial organisation) refusing to process the transaction.
2014-01-25 12:45:03 PM  
2 votes:

Malacon: When I worked as a Teller (at HSBC, actually) we had to fill out paperwork which we just referred to as the "Large Dollar" form when someone took out cash over a certain number or a bank check over a certain dollar amount. We needed ID, SS# and I think a reason for the withdrawal. We would never deny the withdrawal though, unless they refused to fill out the paperwork.

I wish I could remember the details (it's been over a decade) but I want to say it was over $5k in cash or $10k in a bank check. It was a federal law, not a bank one, and was intended to keep tabs on possible money laundering or something...

Fark. I remember so little of it this post is probably useless... sorry.


You're talking about what is now called a Currency Transaction Report, for any transaction involving cash over 10,000.

You get name/business, social security number or tax ID, and a few other personal details. It's a federal law designed to prevent moneu laundering.

Some people/businesses can apply to be exempt from the requirements, but some businesses (car dealerships, restaurants, any industry that's been often used as a "front" for money laundering) can't.

There's also a Suspicious Activity Report that can involve any behavior or amount, but that's different.
2014-01-25 12:25:34 PM  
2 votes:
When I worked as a Teller (at HSBC, actually) we had to fill out paperwork which we just referred to as the "Large Dollar" form when someone took out cash over a certain number or a bank check over a certain dollar amount. We needed ID, SS# and I think a reason for the withdrawal. We would never deny the withdrawal though, unless they refused to fill out the paperwork.

I wish I could remember the details (it's been over a decade) but I want to say it was over $5k in cash or $10k in a bank check. It was a federal law, not a bank one, and was intended to keep tabs on possible money laundering or something...

Fark. I remember so little of it this post is probably useless... sorry.
2014-01-25 12:25:11 PM  
2 votes:

italie: Here is a deposit slip for my new bank, the one down the street. Written on that slip is the amount of money I have in your bank, that will now be put into their bank. I'd like that in singles, please.

Itemized enough for you, baitch?


Itemize away, if the bank loses too many customers, they'll just collect bailout money from your taxes or quantitative easing programs.

/welfare for the rich
2014-01-25 12:22:08 PM  
2 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: If they're worried about people with fake IDs trying to access accounts they could just require customers to set up security questions that they'd have to answer in the event of a large out of character withdrawal.


It seems likelier that they're worried of being accused of helping criminals launder money. Because HSBC has done that. A lot.

Clearly they've decided to protect themselves from further prosecution by restricting their money-laundering services to the few clients who have millions or billions of ill-gotten gains, and making a big show of being a pain in the ass to small-time criminals and, uh, . . . what do they call people who get their money honestly? "Saps", I suppose.

/ "chumps"?
2014-01-25 12:20:09 PM  
2 votes:

unlikely: TuteTibiImperes: If they're worried about people with fake IDs trying to access accounts they could just require customers to set up security questions that they'd have to answer in the event of a large out of character withdrawal.

My credit union does this


My bank (efirstbank.com) does this... if I want to do a really big transaction, I need to call ahead to the phone people so they can note in my account, and they require my password to authorize it. Originally it was a high amount, but I asked them to change it to 1,000... so if anyone tries any shenanigans without pre-authorizing, the bank both denies the transaction and calls my cell phone automatically.
2014-01-25 12:17:56 PM  
2 votes:
see, living paycheck-to-paycheck pays off! I knew it.

/who's laughing now.
2014-01-25 12:16:25 PM  
2 votes:

Demetrius: Customer: "I'll be closing my account please."


This.
2014-01-25 11:46:32 AM  
2 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: If they're worried about people with fake IDs trying to access accounts they could just require customers to set up security questions that they'd have to answer in the event of a large out of character withdrawal.


My credit union does this
2014-01-25 11:18:32 AM  
2 votes:
"You shouldn't have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It's not theirs, it's yours."

LMAO if he really believes this.
2014-01-25 07:37:11 PM  
1 votes:
TuteTibiImperes:

If they're worried about people with fake IDs trying to access accounts they could just require customers to set up security questions that they'd have to answer in the event of a large out of character withdrawal.

Not the damn security questions.

My bank added those for online access, there were about 25 the choose from, but I could not answer any of them. I am not married, have no children, didn't go to college, don't know where my paternal grandfather was born, (he died when my dad was 6), don't have a nephew, my mom didn't have a middle name, etc......
2014-01-25 06:32:12 PM  
1 votes:

Thingster: BafflerMeal: Coming soon to the US. The banks aready immdiately report large transactions to the fed. The bar is set somewhere

Single 10k transaction, or multiple smaller ones that add up to 10k in a "short" period of time, short being subjective.


SAR = Suspicious Activity Report.
CTR - Currency Transaction Report
A cash economy on any scale makes governments nervous.
2014-01-25 03:54:32 PM  
1 votes:
something tells me that they don't ask investment bankers whether they are going to spend all that cash on cocaine.
2014-01-25 03:13:11 PM  
1 votes:
Cash is only for small stuff, anything larger use a debitcard. It's much more convenient and safer for everybody.

In Denmark it's illegal to buy anything for cash, that cost over 2000$. (This law was created because members of Hells Angels were getting wellfare, while having a large illegal income at the same time)
2014-01-25 03:11:32 PM  
1 votes:

Warlordtrooper: The FBI has no business getting that info outside of a warrant signed by a judge based on probable cause.


Meanwhile, back in reality, BSA/AML was signed into law 44 years ago, tightened up by Title III of the PATRIOT Act, and has met with no significant legal challenges, although the information is collected by FinCEN, not the FBI.
2014-01-25 02:10:52 PM  
1 votes:

mccallcl: Isn't this the bank that was laundering money for terrorists?


Yes.  Most likely if you could show HSBC that the money was destined to go to South America as part of a drug deal they would let you have your cash.
2014-01-25 02:07:43 PM  
1 votes:

BafflerMeal: Coming soon to the US. The banks aready immdiately report large transactions to the fed. The bar is set somewhere


Single 10k transaction, or multiple smaller ones that add up to 10k in a "short" period of time, short being subjective.
2014-01-25 02:05:32 PM  
1 votes:
Try taking out more than $10,000 in a US bank. They are required to log and file it with the IRS and you will be subjected to questioning, as to make sure that it's not illicit money, or legitimate money being used illicitly. "But I'll just take out $9,999 every day!" That would be flagged as a suspicious transaction.

Source: I've taken more than $10k in cash out of the bank more than once.
2014-01-25 01:28:12 PM  
1 votes:

gt4pete: Form 104 is the Currency Transaction Report for banks


FinCEN Report 112, as of April 1 2013, since BSA E-Filing became mandatory.
2014-01-25 01:28:11 PM  
1 votes:
Reporting a large suspicious transaction is standard. Denying a customer cash without proof of what it's for is not.

In any case, I would have thought large deposits of cash were more suspicious but I have never known a bank yet get funny with anyone for pulling that one.
2014-01-25 01:24:34 PM  
1 votes:

Katrushkak: You're talking about what is now called a Currency Transaction Report, for any transaction involving cash over 10,000.

You get name/business, social security number or tax ID, and a few other personal details. It's a federal law designed to prevent moneu laundering.


Exactly. FinCEN's best practice guidelines* include making a record of the reason for the transaction prior to submitting the CTR, in case a pattern of transactions arises which constitutes grounds for a Suspicious Activity Report.

Don't want to give the teller this information? That's OK, she doesn't have to process the transaction.  Probably worth bearing in mind that, in itself, is arguably grounds for a SAR...

*guidelines in the sense of 'do as we say or someone might get hurt'
2014-01-25 01:23:18 PM  
1 votes:

gt4pete: Katrushkak: Malacon: When I worked as a Teller (at HSBC, actually) we had to fill out paperwork which we just referred to as the "Large Dollar" form when someone took out cash over a certain number or a bank check over a certain dollar amount. We needed ID, SS# and I think a reason for the withdrawal. We would never deny the withdrawal though, unless they refused to fill out the paperwork.

I wish I could remember the details (it's been over a decade) but I want to say it was over $5k in cash or $10k in a bank check. It was a federal law, not a bank one, and was intended to keep tabs on possible money laundering or something...

Fark. I remember so little of it this post is probably useless... sorry.

You're talking about what is now called a Currency Transaction Report, for any transaction involving cash over 10,000.

You get name/business, social security number or tax ID, and a few other personal details. It's a federal law designed to prevent moneu laundering.

Some people/businesses can apply to be exempt from the requirements, but some businesses (car dealerships, restaurants, any industry that's been often used as a "front" for money laundering) can't.

There's also a Suspicious Activity Report that can involve any behavior or amount, but that's different.

IIRC this is also known as a "Form 8300"

I used to work at a car dealer and this came up a few times.


Spoke too soon, 8300 is for non-bank businesses.  Form 104 is the Currency Transaction Report for banks:   http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/fin104_ctr.pdf
2014-01-25 01:18:52 PM  
1 votes:

Malacon: When I worked as a Teller (at HSBC, actually) we had to fill out paperwork which we just referred to as the "Large Dollar" form when someone took out cash over a certain number or a bank check over a certain dollar amount. We needed ID, SS# and I think a reason for the withdrawal. We would never deny the withdrawal though, unless they refused to fill out the paperwork.

I wish I could remember the details (it's been over a decade) but I want to say it was over $5k in cash or $10k in a bank check. It was a federal law, not a bank one, and was intended to keep tabs on possible money laundering or something...

Fark. I remember so little of it this post is probably useless... sorry.


So, if someone wrote "hookers and blow" under reason, would you still approve the withdrawal? Because I would write "hookers and blow" every time. Just because.
2014-01-25 01:17:35 PM  
1 votes:
The Mrs. got a rather large inheritance check last year, and our bank (we've banked there for 10+ years) advised us that the majority of it wouldn't be available for 7-10 days, citing "policy". I took that translation to mean "because fark you, that's why", and went to look up US federal law on the subject...

Basically, the law says that banks are allowed to hold any check deposits over $5K (single or aggregate) for 7 business days at the bank's discretion. Even if they can verify within 30 seconds that it's legit, they can hold it for 7 business days and make interest on it. Of course, if you're a "whale" customer and object, they'll release the funds immediately, because it's at the bank's discretion.

So, it's federal law that's allowing the banks to make a little bit of extra scratch off large deposits for no reason. I know this is just tangentially related to TFA, but it pisses me off.

Needless to say, we're a credit union now.
2014-01-25 01:10:12 PM  
1 votes:
It's just a way to stop people from withdrawing funds. Frustrate them.

Now, the question of the day is: Why are they trying to stop people from withdrawing funds?

Scary answer: The don't have the fungible resources to cover them. They lost it.
2014-01-25 01:01:29 PM  
1 votes:
This is why you don't use banks.
2014-01-25 12:48:44 PM  
1 votes:
2014-01-25 12:48:33 PM  
1 votes:

hasty ambush: Speaker2Animals: "You shouldn't have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It's not theirs, it's yours."

LMAO if he really believes this.

And of course government requires banks to report large transactions  as if the "large" transaction itself is probable cause.


Reporting a large transaction is not the same as not giving you the money.
2014-01-25 12:44:44 PM  
1 votes:
HSBC is (are?) slime.

I work weekends as front desk/security at an upscale independent living retirement community.  I used to get hang up calls every half hour about a year ago.  When I *69'd the number (no caller ID at that time) I called it and got an automated system with no way to talk to an actual human, but I did get that it was HSBC.  I googled them and got a couple of numbers and started calling.  First time, I got some guy in a call center in India who told me his name was Chad.  Yeah, right.  He did promise to put a do not call notation next to our number.

Second time, after they kept doing the hang up calls, I got some guy in California who finally fessed up that they were collection calls but denied they were hang ups, stating it only sounded like it as it then went direct to him or his co-workers.  I told him to stop lying, as it did not.  The only way I got him was to google his company and start calling.  I told him the person he was trying to reach never works on the weekends and that the hang up calls were interfering with a business.  I told him they were to stop and stop now or my next call would be to our state atty. general who is hell on wheels against phone collection harassment.  That woke them up and they stopped.
2014-01-25 12:42:43 PM  
1 votes:

Demetrius: Customer: "I'll be closing my account please now"

2014-01-25 12:36:35 PM  
1 votes:

unlikely: TuteTibiImperes: If they're worried about people with fake IDs trying to access accounts they could just require customers to set up security questions that they'd have to answer in the event of a large out of character withdrawal.

My credit union does this


Credit Unions for the win;

Bank Vs Credit Union
Bank: Insufficient funds? $30 per transaction because you already don't have money so we will take more of what you don't have...
Credit Union: Insufficient funds? It's ok! You have a $500 line of "credit" you owe back to yourself.


pffft.  To hell with banks..
2014-01-25 12:34:34 PM  
1 votes:
As someone who works in the car business, where people consistently make large down payments (sometimes in cash), fark this company. The customer can do what they want with their money.

I've yet to figure out WHY some people want to carry around $8000 in twenties. I guess checks don't exist in the magical land of inefficient commerce.
2014-01-25 12:28:14 PM  
1 votes:

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: mccallcl: Isn't this the bank that was laundering money for terrorists?

The one we foolishly let off the hook with a light slap to the wrist? Yes.


And because of their screw-up, they've had to place unrealistic anti-money laundering requirements on their customers.
2014-01-25 12:26:15 PM  
1 votes:

IanMoone: I'm surprised banks in the US don't do this yet.

Mainly because attorneys have argued in court that if a bank doesn't try to stop Grandma from withdrawing her life savings and wiring it to her grandson in Costa Rica who got busted for DUI and lost his passport, well.....that's the banks fault and they need to reimburse Grandma.


That, and someone pretending to be the owner of a bank account and trying to empty it. People cry for more protection from theft and fraud, and then complain that the efforts to prevent theft and fraud are too burdensome? Ridiculous.
2014-01-25 12:25:11 PM  
1 votes:

Demetrius: Customer: "I'll be closing my account please."


Came here to say this.

mccallcl: Isn't this the bank that was laundering money for terrorists?


Apparently it was for mexican drug cartels.
2014-01-25 12:23:20 PM  
1 votes:

mccallcl: Isn't this the bank that was laundering money for terrorists?


The one we foolishly let off the hook with a light slap to the wrist? Yes.
2014-01-25 12:14:05 PM  
1 votes:
Simple solution withdraw 3000 a day until empty, tell the teller to let the rest of her staff to sod off.
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report