I have contacted Santander and asked them to close my bank account.

I have transferred my pension and all other financial transactions into my Halifax account.

However Santander will freeze my cash deposits.

When my house proceeds go into my Halifax account, I will use the money to take Santander to court.

In court they will have to prove that I was money laundering.

Thay have no evidence at all, so I can't loose the court case.

I am expecting to get my money back plus a load of compensation for being accused

of something I have never done.

Chief, in all honesty £6k is a large sum of cash for any individual to have lying around and unable to prove its legitimacy.

I would raise an eyebrow and Im not even the suspicious type.

When my house proceeds go into my Halifax account, I will use the money to take Santander to court.

In court they will have to prove that I was money laundering.

Thay have no evidence at all, so I can't loose the court case.

I am expecting to get my money back plus a load of compensation for being accused

of something I have never done.

Be sure to let us know how you get on.

What cause of action / head of claim will you be using to establish your claim, and what actionable harm has been caused to you?

My prediction?

A) They will claim they never accused you, only investigated (and on reasonable suspicion)

B) They will claim their actions were mandated by law, and thus lawful.

My cause of action is theft as they have no evidence against me and never will.

Harm is obvious, I need the money to fund my house move due to divorce.

Retaining my money without evedence of any noney laundering is simply legalised theft.

Why do you agree with legalised theft??

Theft is

1) appropriating the property of another

2) with dishonest intent

3) to permanently deprive.

You could prove 1).

You'll struggle to prove 2) or 3).

Thus, it isn't theft.

What is "legalised theft"?. That is a term used by 'drama llamas'

Theft is illegal.

If it is legal, it can't be theft. If it is theft, it can't be legal.

I don't agree with "legalised theft", since I don't believe it can exist.

My cause of action is theft as they have no evidence against me and never will.

Not theft, for the reasons previously stated.

Hang on, though .....

Went to the local Post Office today to pay in the cash I have received from items I recently sold on Ebay.

 

 

They refused to allow me to put the money in my Santander bank account due to the laws on money laundering.

 

 

They said if they took the cash and credited my account, then my account would be frozen pending an investigation on where the money came from.

 

 

I don't have receipts because the buyers of my items paid cash on collection.

I give up with this crazy country.

 

 

Paying the cash in would result in my account being frozen until I prove where the money came from.

Having my account frozen would prevent me from being able to access my pension.

Not having receipts from the items I sold on Ebay implies that my bank account would be frozen for ever I would loose my pension and have nothing to live on.

 

 

Who brought in these stupid laws that assume honest people who sell honestly obtained second hand items are drug dealers?

So, they warned you what would happen (and why ; the anti money laundering legislation), yet you carried on regardless.

Your account was frozen (as they warned you it would be), yet you want to sue them for harm.

You stand more chance of suing yourself for your own actions bringing about exactly what you had been warned of!

Not theft, for the reasons previously stated.

 

Hang on, though .....

 

 

So, they warned you what would happen (and why ; the anti money laundering legislation), yet you carried on regardless.

Your account was frozen (as they warned you it would be), yet you want to sue them for harm.

You stand more chance of suing yourself for your own actions bringing about exactly what you had been warned of!

Not too sure you are correct.

Today my son transferred some money from his bank account into my frozen bank account and the

transaction went through. So I conclude that my bank account is only frozen for withdrawing money, not

paying money in. That seems dodgy to me.

Therefore I logically assume that the proceeds from the sale of my house will be accepted into my bank

account and never released impending an investigation into previous smaller cash deposits.

Such a situation will be interesting when I have to pay half of the house equity to my ex wife

when the money is frozen in my bank account.

I will end up in court due to non compliance to the terms of the divorce consent order.

Hopefully the judge will demand that the bank prove I have been money laundering

rather than expecting me to prove otherwise.

Now if a bank has frozen your account for withdrawals but will accept money being paid in, then that's

theft in my opinion., Bazza, I do get the impression that your voice becomes muffled when you sit down.

Therefore I logically assume that the proceeds from the sale of my house will be accepted into my bank

account and never released impending an investigation into previous smaller cash deposits.

You can use the Halifax account though, can't you?

HB

Hi Honeybee,

Thanks for yor post. Yes I have thought of doing that.

However, my monthly credit report from Noddle shows I have a bank account with Santander and

another with Halifax. I therefore assume that both banks will accuse me of money laundering and

block withdrawals but accept money paid in.

This is theft.

Theft, why?

HB

Theft, why?

 

HB

Accepting money paid in and refusing to allow me to withdraw any money pending an

investigation for money laundering. Thats theft isn't it?

I don't think I ever suggested the proceeds of the sale be paid in cash. I suggested that if you were using a solicitor, the solicitor could split the money between you and you ex and if not using a solicitor , the buyer might be willing to pay you half and your ex half or whatever the amounts need to be.

I appreciate just how frustrating beourocracy can be but I think everyone is making reasonable comments and you really are just making matters worse.

What possessed you to pay the cash in after being warned?

Are you really saying there is no paper trail of the money, e.g history on eBay or PayPal, emails from the purchaser etc.

I think you really are not helping yourself and god knows I am one of the worst for that

Theft, why?

 

HB

 

Accepting money paid in and refusing to allow me to withdraw any money pending an

investigation for money laundering. Thats theft isn't it?

Are they trying to permanently deprive you of the money?

They are following law

Theft, why?

 

HB

 

Accepting money paid in and refusing to allow me to withdraw any money pending an

investigation for money laundering. Thats theft isn't it?

I think BazzaS has already covered theft. In any case, if you've only just opened an account with the Halifax, I imagine they won't judge you. Especially if the money arrives from a solicitor's account.

We sold our house not very long ago and our bank didn't say anything about the sale proceeds arriving in the account.

HB

Chief is that nose of yours useful for spite towards your face?

Chief is that nose of yours useful for spite towards your face?

What do youn mean chum?

Its a joke Chief! I feel you are aware of the difficulties in advance you are experiencing (even though I do not know you) and just being awkward for awkwards sake?

Chief is that nose of yours useful for spite towards your face?

What do youn mean chum?

He might mean that you seem intent on engineering a poor situation that you then whinge about.

You could have taken the bank staff's advice and not caused your account to be frozen.

You could take the other advice offered on this thread [get your solicitor to pay your ex-wife's share to her directly, avoiding any issues with your bank account(s), and complying with the divorce settlement order!]

You could get your solicitor to pay any remaining equity into an unaffected account, or hold it in a client account until the money laundering investigation is complete.

These won't allow you as much melodrama as deliberately creating a situation you can then complain about, though. (Nor complain of 'theft' that is nothing of the sort!)

Is this the same marital home that you claimed:

A) had become worthless, and

B) that you might as well just demolish ?

So, not worthless nor demolished, then!

My house has now been demolished by a friend of my son who is a demolition expert.

Now the wife can claim half the value of a load of rubble.

Good luck to her.

She can now sue you for the whole plot and build a new build to her design VAT free.

My house has now been demolished by a friend of my son who is a demolition expert.

Now the wife can claim half the value of a load of rubble.

Good luck to her.

As another has mentioned : she could claim for 1/2 of the value of the assets before the demolition, if she can show malice.

You may be left with nothing if she gets the remaining asset : the land.

That would fit very neatly into "cutting your nose off to spite your face".

You'd prefer 100% of nothing to 50% of something?.

To make things even worse I have now obtained a divorce consent order.

My ex-wife and I have agreed to share the house proceeds 50/50.

 

..........

 

The consent order clearly states that if I do not meet the conditions set out within it, then I

will go to prison for contempt of court.

 

Wouldn't demolishing the house be breaching the consent order?