47 NAT

I was under the impression that anyone could have one of these and the Goverment had told banks to oblige?

In brief, I need a basic account for mainly direct debits for the usual mortgage, insurance, telephone,etc, etc I tried to open one with Lloyds and was told while I was opening it that they wouldnt go ahead with it as my proofs of ID signatures didnt match up! WTF?!? One was my passport which is 9 years old and the other was my d/licence from 1989. After telling him in no uncertain terms that I wasnt happy, I left.

Since then I've tried to open one with Alliance & Leicester and I've been told it'll take up to 6 weeks

I dont want an overdraft or credit card are anything like that. I'm just looking to get my wages paid in and DD's took out and to ocassionally use the cashpoint machine. I dont want a current account and my existing savings account does'nt allow DD's

Why the hell do they make it so difficult It seems like they dont want to open them Is there a governing body that I can contact over it as the last thing I want is to apply to every bank and have a load of scores against my name on my credit file ....

Nath

suprabeast

How comes you've never had a bank account up until now??

47 NAT

I did have one, but I closed it a while ago. I also cancelled all my credit cards in case I fell for the temptaion of using them. I'm a great believer of not spending money I dont have (apart from the mortgage of course) ....

fast bloke

try Natwest dual account. you get a cash card and a direct debit facility - nothing else

Tentenths

I find it difficult to believe that it is possible to live without a bank account these days...

Are you paid in cash?
Surely, you don't all your bills (inc. mortgage) with cash?
Are you saying you don't have any direct debits/standing orders?

As to Lloyd's decision, it sounds as if you're a victim of the government's decision to make financial institutions (not too mention car dealers, estate agents, solicitors, accountants etc etc) act as unpaid policemen, supposedly in an effort to combat organised crime.

The anti money laundering regulations mean that before any new account may be opened the banks are obliged to carry out very prescriptive identity checks. The penalties for failing to do so are horrendous, and apply to the employee as much as the bank. So, to be fair to Lloyds, its not really their fault - blame the government.

Having said that, Lloyds' decision does seem to me to be something of an over reaction - but then I don't know the full story. Didn't they ask for any alternative evidence as a means of additional verification before declining you?