Contributors: banks have found a new reason for blocking accounts

✨ Megiddo

✨ President ✨
Staff member
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
13,580
Likes
2,643
Points
1,730
Banks began to use another tool to lock funds. Credit organizations began to be interested in what customers spend the withdrawn money from the account, as well as how they earned to open a deposit. This was reported to Izvestia by clients of Sberbank and MKB, in which credit organizations took an interest in the fate of savings. For failure to provide the requested information, banks threaten to block the client’s account or contribution. Financial organizations operate within the framework of the “anti-laundering” law, and Rosfinmonitoring did not see any excess of authority on the part of banks. Experts note that in recent years, cases of blocking accounts have become widespread, which prevents bona fide citizens and businesses.
Where and to

Clients of Sberbank and MKB were faced with the fact that credit organizations began to demand information about the origin of money from them for opening a deposit, and also what funds were withdrawn from the account. This information was given to Izvestia by clients of MKB and Sberbank.

One of them was saving money at SME Bank, and then decided to transfer it to a contribution to the IBC. Shortly after the opening of the deposit, the bank demanded an explanation of the origin of the funds, including extracts from the credit institution in which they were previously kept. In addition, the bank requested a written explanation on the further use of money. The client fears that his contribution may be blocked.

A similar story happened with another person. He saved money for a large purchase on a deposit in one bank, but it was more convenient to withdraw them through an account in another - Sberbank. A week after the withdrawal of cash on hand, the state bank blocked the account, demanding that the client provide documents on the origin of the funds and explain what they were spent on. He submitted the documents, but the bank promised to make a decision only within three weeks. The user decided not to leave the complaint in special bodies, because there was still a small amount on the account.

Usually, under the “anti-laundering” law, banks block accounts for suspicious transactions. For example, for frequent remittances between citizens and organizations for large sums. Interest in deposits banks almost never showed. And certainly not trying to block the account a week after the withdrawal of money from him.

In Sberbank, Izvestia was told that when detecting unusual transactions, the bank would contact the client for an explanation of the source of funds in accordance with the law. Requirements for financial organizations to control customers' incomes, transactions, and money transactions are spelled out in the “anti-money laundering” Law No. 115. Sberbank noted that they did not disclose the threshold amounts and criteria for operations that seem suspicious to the security service. But according to the law, they should check all operations from 600 thousand rubles. The package of documents that is required to unlock an account can be individualized for each case. For example, you may need service contracts or donation documents, clarified in Sberbank.

Under the magnifying glass

The bank really has the right to check its customers if it has doubts about the legality of operations, the deputy head of Rosfinmonitoring, Secretary of State Pavel Livadny told Izvestia. This applies to both individuals and legal entities. He added that a financial institution may be interested in an operation not only within the framework of an “anti-money laundering” law, but also for the security of the client himself, suspecting the interference of fraudsters.

In accordance with the requirements of Rosfinmonitoring, the bank is obliged to check operations for the amount of more than 600 thousand rubles, but for its own reasons it may be interested in smaller operations. If the bank’s assumptions are justified, it can block suspicious transactions or refuse customer service, Pavel Livadny explained. In case of disagreement with the refusal of a credit institution to conduct an operation, a citizen may apply to a special commission, which consists of representatives of the Central Bank and Rosfinmonitoring, or directly to the court, he added.

The banks from the top 30, surveyed by Izvestia, confirmed that they constantly monitor customer transactions for compliance with the law on money laundering and money laundering. The analysis takes place regardless of the amount of money noted in Alfa Bank. VTB told that the monitoring process takes into account a number of factors, among them - the client’s total portfolio, previous operations, the history of interaction with the bank, the counterparty profile.

In financial organizations, they noted that they are trying not to harm the conscientious citizens, therefore, blocking is carried out only after a thorough multivariate analysis. The main thing for the client is to respond in a timely manner to the request for additional information and documents, the press service of the Bank Ak Bars assured.

Now the special service of the Central Bank for the protection of clients' rights is working promptly, the regulator has preoccupied the problem, Vladimir Gamza, chairman of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry Chamber's Committee on Financial Markets, has been actively working in this direction. According to him, in the past few years, cases of blocking accounts have become widespread. The reason for this is the ill-conceived requirements of Rosfinmonitoring and the Central Bank, which allow blocking all suspicious transactions without sufficient grounds, the expert believes.

Banks are afraid not to follow the recommendations of the regulatory authorities and sometimes they approach this too diligently - with excesses, agreed Yaroslav Kabakov, Director for Strategy at Finam Investment Company. They are afraid of revocation of licenses for non-compliance with legislation, he added. The expert recalled that previously proposed amendments to 115-FZ, limiting the rights of banks to maintain blacklists, hitting which organizations or individual entrepreneurs are practically doomed to end the business.
 
Top Bottom