Sure i get they all have issues on some level.
My issue is that these internet only banks appear to be closing accounts then effectively seizing the money. I’m sure they quote all sorts of regulations including AML.
As someone who works at one of the UK’s share registrars and have done on and off for over 8 years, I personally have been through various trainings including AML, DPA, GDPR, financial crime etc. I’m now a permanent member of staff there and not a contractor and the amount of training and compliance stuff has risen.
I’m happy to say that while I’m no expert, I can hold my own when it comes to most of these matters in discussion if it comes up down the pub, or wherever.
My point it these internet only banks (and e money institutions, to give Revolut it’s proper title, and monese) appear to be quoting all these regs, ok sure I get it, tipping off and all that.
My point is that when customers who have had more then a measly £9 somethig seized take it to the small claims court, by miracle the money (funds) gets returned. This doesn’t quite appear like AML compliance, at least where I’m standing as I’m sure if there were genuine concerns of money laundering or financial crime taking place, the small claims court would not be able to get these “banks” and e-money institutions to refund the ex customers.
As I say I’m well aware the others have been in banking scandals of their own, but actions like the above, appear to be limited specifically to the newer online only banks and e money institutions.
Also I am aware that people who have had their wages paid into the neo banks have had their accounts closed and money seized also. Most of these form the bulk of the people taking alcases to the small claims court as it’s not small sums on the table.
If we need to agree to disagree that’s ok, but I do think people need to go in “with their eyes open before opening an account”.