
“Barclays closed down my bank account after Bitcoin trade” - edward
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/11537972/Barclays-closed-down-my-bank-account-after-Bitcoin-trade.html
======
07d046
From Reddit:

> Amazing how an experienced reporter can whip up three lines' worth of
> information into a half-page article. "Barclay's closes account of 17-year
> -old bitcoin-trading client after noticing a 50£ deposit of fraudulent
> origin. The bank eventually offers 40£ of compensation for having blocked
> the withdrawal of his 400£ balance for a few days." The article even
> includes three photos that show to readers what a 17-year-old and a bank
> look like.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/330im7/barclays_cl...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/330im7/barclays_closed_down_my_bank_account_after/)

------
alphydan
A close friend had the same problem with Lloyds. Except the full funds to pay
for his studies were frozen for 3 months and no apology or explanation was
given. After 3 months writing letters to customer service, financial
ombudsman, etc ... the account was closed, he was given a check and asked not
to come back. (And I know first hand that no fraud was committed)

------
DiabloD3
So wait, a bank offered to pay him 40 pounds because of their mistake that
took less than a couple days to fix? As an American, that is amazing.

Banks here typically don't do shit even if you threaten to close your account
when they screw up, and when they screw up they don't want to fix it at all
unless you contact the Office of the Comptroller of Currency; the only
exception is small banks and credit unions that actually do give a damn, and
those, in my experience, are rare.

~~~
userbinator
Threatening to close the account would not have worked in this case, as that's
what the bank wanted to do anyway.

------
exo762
What are possible reasons of such behavior? Is it a lack of understanding of
Bitcoin? Is it a malicious behavior motivated by fear? Is it AML related
thing?

~~~
emiliobumachar
Banks are very paranoid about criminals using their system, to the point that
a slight suspicion triggers their internal police.

That's mandated by laws, government agencies and, to a very large extent, by
the public. Look up HN discussions when HSBC got a small-ish fine for not
doing enough to stop mexican drug cartels from giving them business. We were
demanding jail time for everyone involved.

~~~
shit_parade2
They should be paranoid since banks lose billions to fraud every year.

Of course they commit hundreds of billions of dollars in fraud so it doesn't
much matter.

------
f3llowtraveler
An easy solution is to avoid bank transfers for Bitcoin transactions, and
instead to deal in cash.

Since Bitcoin is another form of cash, it becomes an exchange of one form of
cash for another. There is no future risk of the transaction being reversed
due to fraud.

------
TwoBit
I'm going to guess that the transaction in question was indeed fraudulent and
the student is not as innocent as he claims to be.

~~~
alphydan
In the specific example I know about, the transaction was simple: Student
sells 1 bitcoin on localbitcoins. User (only known by his localbitcoins
handle) transfers money to student account. Student transfers 1 bitcoin to
user. Bank freezes the student's account.

They claimed the transfer was fraudulent but zero explanations were given.
However they asked the student to tell the user to show up at a bank branch to
vouch for the transaction's legitimacy. Obviously the user never responded to
the request.

\- Had the user been selling drugs? \- Was the user's account empty? Did he
pay with credit and never payed back? \- Was he a known criminal to the Bank?

It's like selling a bicycle on ebay. If it turns out the person who paid for
the bike was a criminal, how is the seller supposed to know? Wouldn't the bank
be at fault for accepting the transfer if they know it comes from a fraudulent
account?

I don't know about this specific example (Telegraph article), but I know of
another example where the account was frozen and closed with zero
explanations.

------
shit_parade2
Why is mylisp comment dead? HN moderation makes no sense.

~~~
GFischer
A new account shilling for a service perhaps?

If you have only one comment, and it's a thinly veiled advertisement for a
site, I'd be suspicious too.

~~~
shit_parade2
It was a personal anecdote followed by an extremely common bitcoin service.
Anyone who's been in Bitcoin knows of localbitcoin or knows meeting in person
is a common activity.

I've seen much worse astro turfing throwing off large discussions by unused
accounts hundreds of days old, and no response from mods. Mod policy is
arbitrary and cultish.

