Hacker News Reader

Comment by programmertote | Hacker News Reader

Sorry to hear your story/experience. This worries me because my mother, who currently resides in a SE Asian nation, is transferring some of her money to me (in the hope that she can use it when she migrates to the US).

Did Chase let you withdraw the outstanding balance in full when they closed your account? The last thing I want is to see my money being trapped in limbo state...

View on HN

Yes, they sent me a cashier check for a small balance (around $1000) I left, as Chase gave me 45 days heads up for closure. However, for some people, Chase dragged out until after CFPB complaints are filed.

The case one should worry about these banks is this: you deposit a $500K check, or you got a wire for $500K; check was cleared on the sender's side. Now Chase/Big Bank holds your funds, saying that this check is fraudulent, and that bank closes your account after finding you risky (risky because of this $500k and by looking back at your account history). Now $500K is in Chase's hands, your account is closed by Chase, and Chase doesn't want to give $500K, nor does Chase want to return $500K to the original bank/sender. This is where you should file a complaint with CFPB right away. Without CFPB complaints, the fraud department at Chase, its Bank employees just give you run around for months. File CFPB complaint right away, if any bank holds your funds after 10 business days; don't listen to these employees at all.

CFPB can't force banks to reopen your accounts. Just to get your funds, file a complaint with CFPB right away, and don't trust any bank employee on getting your funds.

I'm very far from dealing with 500k personal banking transactions, but my immediate thought is that if you're doing so you're probably making mistakes. If it's revenue from sale of a company or similar, move it through escrow with your attorney. If it's a legal settlement, do the same. If you don't have an attorney but are dealing with hundreds of thousands of dollars, get an attorney. If it's income from trading or investing it should likely be a transaction from a recognized brokerage which shouldn't raise red flags - and if it's a private investment, see above about an attorney.

And of course if it's business transactions, do it with a business account.

I just gave an example based on what I read on reddit, as I never deposited $500K in my life. I have no problems with banks' closing accounts, as I have accounts with a couple of local credit unions, who are nice to me.

What caused the closure? A legitimate transaction that they find suspicious. Conjunction of two issues--not sending the funds back and closing the account without releasing funds to the customer--is real 'thievery' in my opinion. Since big banks are NOT interested in resolving disputes about funds by lying to customers, better file a complaint with CFPB right away with many details and documents.

Perhaps we should stop spreading second-hand anecdotes from Reddit as authoritative examples of what can/has/should happen.

One should get an attorney if they desire legal representation, period. Otherwise it's quite perverse to be contributing to one of the main guilds facilitating this cesspool of overregulation, just in the hopes that their social status is going to make a bank think twice. And also attorneys aren't immune from this. In fact, one reason to actually get an attorney is that you want to launder some money.

Also, business accounts aren't immune from this dynamic, as per the article. It seems like you're just grasping at bureaucratic straws here in search of the just world theory. But no, the whole thing is really an accountable terrible dynamic that will continue to get worse and worse until it affects enough people that the laws change.

Lawyers are not of much help when it comes to reopening already-closed accounts. Most of the time, banks will send a cashier check for whatever money left, if they close accounts abruptly. Sometimes, they give a month to move funds elsewhere. When a bank closes an account for that last check which they find suspicious--subsequently cleared by the payee bank, that's when banks give a run around. File a complaint with CFPB without any lawyer, unless of course that amount is substantial.

I agree - you don't need an attorney to file a complaint with the CFPB, and you should file a complaint with the CFPB ASAP when a bank starts pulling this crap. But the comment I was responding to was saying you should have an attorney to handle any large transaction, which I disagree with.

I wouldn't expect them to help with reopening, but if a bank is investigating an unexpected large deposit and determines that "Oh, it's coming from a law firm's escrow account" it gives at least one obvious possible explanation - and may also indicate to investigators that the account holder is someone with legal representation so don't be sloppy.

Wait hold up, lawyers can help you avoid the law as well?

I suspect the bar would not allow that.

You obviously can't cold call an attorney and ask for help laundering money. But if you find a money laundering operation through the proper channels, then it will likely involve a law firm somewhere that's facilitating making it properly legible to the system - setting up less-than-truthful companies, generating copious fraudulent documentation, etc. If anything attorneys' trust accounts should be receiving more scrutiny rather than less - using your account to handle money held in trust for someone else is generally something that sets off compliance department alarm bells, and for good reason (well, as good of a reason as there can be in the context of this topic).

If you are buying a house with cash, you are likely to be transferring $500K+. I do not think an attorney is necessary for the transfer.

When you buy a house an attorney is likely involved, but, in any case, you're going to be transferring the 500k through escrow, not making a direct deposit or wire transfer.

I made a wire transfer to the escrow agent.

Kind of amazing that doing “aaand it’s gone” with $500k that is provably legitimate is “an issue requiring a complaint to a specialized bureau” and not “a grand larceny charge from the DA.”

If you are moving this much money regularly using these means you will be using a private bank which is a completely different experience. Maybe some people get caught in the transition to wealth before private banking but having moved significant amounts of money a few times, the banks generally do not want to hang onto it against your will.

I don't like saying this, but the Farage fiasco involved a "high touch" personal private bank, Coutts (now a subsidiary of NatWest)

He apparently made the fatal error of being both a terrible person and not wealthy enough at the same time.

Glad to hear they gave your money back in full. I'm now really concerned. It sucks that there seems to be no accountability in the system. I get that they want to catch the folks who abuse the banking system, but if they do, they (the government and the banks) should at least set up a proper channel to give reasons and allow folks like us (regular Joe's) to file complaints. The current system seems really ripe for abuse.

> This worries me because my mother, who currently resides in a SE Asian nation, is transferring some of her money to me (in the hope that she can use it when she migrates to the US).

The problem is what you are describing is not exactly legal. You are acting as a money transmitter for your mother; and this might even trigger for you some complex tax obligations.

What you should do is open a Chase bank account for your mother. You already bank with the agency.

You get a check for the balance of your account, but they take their sweet time getting it to you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com