Bank-Run Fears Continue; HSBC Restricts Large Cash Withdrawals

Bank-Run Fears Continue; HSBC Restricts Large Cash Withdrawals

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/24/2014 21:31 -0500

Following research last week suggesting that HSBC has a major capital shortfall, the fact that several farmer's co-ops were unable to pay back depositors in China, and, of course, the liquidity crisis in China itself, news from The BBC that HSBC is imposing restrictions on large cash withdrawals raising a number of red flags. The BBC reports that some HSBC customers have been prevented from withdrawing large amounts of cash because they could not provide evidence of why they wanted it. HSBC admitted it has not informed customers of the change in policy, which was implemented in November for their own good: "We ask our customers about the purpose of large cash withdrawals when they are unusual... the reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime." As one customer responded: "you shouldn't have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It's not theirs, it's yours."

Via The BBC,

Some HSBC customers have been prevented from withdrawing large amounts of cash because they could not provide evidence of why they wanted it, the BBC has learnt.

Listeners have told Radio 4's Money Box they were stopped from withdrawing amounts ranging from £5,000 to £10,000.

HSBC admitted it has not informed customers of the change in policy, which was implemented in November.

The bank says it has now changed its guidance to staff.
...

"When we presented them with the withdrawal slip, they declined to give us the money because we could not provide them with a satisfactory explanation for what the money was for. They wanted a letter from the person involved."

Mr Cotton says the staff refused to tell him how much he could have: "So I wrote out a few slips. I said, 'Can I have £5,000?' They said no. I said, 'Can I have £4,000?' They said no. And then I wrote one out for £3,000 and they said, 'OK, we'll give you that.' "

He asked if he could return later that day to withdraw another £3,000, but he was told he could not do the same thing twice in one day.
...

Mr Cotton cannot understand HSBC's attitude: "I've been banking in that bank for 28 years. They all know me in there. You shouldn't have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It's not theirs, it's yours."
...

HSBC has said that following customer feedback, it was changing its policy: "We ask our customers about the purpose of large cash withdrawals when they are unusual and out of keeping with the normal running of their account. Since last November, in some instances we may have also asked these customers to show us evidence of what the cash is required for."

"The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced."
...

But Eric Leenders, head of retail at the British Bankers Association, said banks were sensible to ask questions of their customers: "I can understand it's frustrating for customers. But if you are making the occasional large cash withdrawal, the bank wants to make sure it's the right way to make the payment."

The arrogance is incredible...


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...sh-withdrawals

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7212/7...8cbb444a_o.jpg

24 January 2014 Last updated at 14:59 ET

HSBC imposes restrictions on large cash withdrawals

By Bob Howard Reporter, Money Box

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/image...owjhc7qm-1.jpg

HSBC customers requiring large cash withdrawals may be asked what they want the money for

Continue reading the main story Personal Banking

• What the new TSB means for customers
• Q&A: Switching bank accounts
• UK 'has lost 40% of bank branches'
• The bank branch of the future?

Some HSBC customers have been prevented from withdrawing large amounts of cash because they could not provide evidence of why they wanted it, the BBC has learnt.
Listeners have told Radio 4's Money Box they were stopped from withdrawing amounts ranging from £5,000 to £10,000.
HSBC admitted it has not informed customers of the change in policy, which was implemented in November.
The bank says it has now changed its guidance to staff.
New rules Stephen Cotton went to his local HSBC branch this month to withdraw £7,000 from his instant access savings account to pay back a loan from his mother.
A year before, he had withdrawn a larger sum in cash from HSBC without a problem.
But this time it was different, as he told Money Box: "When we presented them with the withdrawal slip, they declined to give us the money because we could not provide them with a satisfactory explanation for what the money was for. They wanted a letter from the person involved."
Mr Cotton says the staff refused to tell him how much he could have: "So I wrote out a few slips. I said, 'Can I have £5,000?' They said no. I said, 'Can I have £4,000?' They said no. And then I wrote one out for £3,000 and they said, 'OK, we'll give you that.' "
He asked if he could return later that day to withdraw another £3,000, but he was told he could not do the same thing twice in one day.
Continue reading the main story “Start Quote

As this was not a change to the Terms and Conditions of your bank account we had no need to pre-notify customers of the change”

End Quote HSBC customer letter
He wrote to complain to HSBC about the new rules and also that he had not been informed of any change.
The bank said it did not have to tell him. "As this was not a change to the Terms and Conditions of your bank account, we had no need to pre-notify customers of the change," HSBC wrote.
Frustrated customers Mr Cotton cannot understand HSBC's attitude: "I've been banking in that bank for 28 years. They all know me in there. You shouldn't have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It's not theirs, it's yours."
Peter from Wiltshire, who wanted his surname withheld, had a similar experience.
He wanted to take out £10 000 cash from HSBC, some to pay to his sons and some to fund his long-haul travel plans.
Peter phoned up the day before to give HSBC notice and everything seemed to be fine.
The next day he got a call from his local branch asking him to pay his sons via a bank payment and to provide booking receipts for his holidays. Peter did not have any booking receipts to show.
The following day he spoke to HSBC again and this time, having examined his account, it said he could withdraw the £10,000.
Belinda Bell is another customer who was initially denied her cash, in her case to pay her builder. She told Money Box she had to provide the builder's quote.
Customer protection HSBC has said that following customer feedback, it was changing its policy: "We ask our customers about the purpose of large cash withdrawals when they are unusual and out of keeping with the normal running of their account. Since last November, in some instances we may have also asked these customers to show us evidence of what the cash is required for."
"The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime. However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologise to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced."
Continue reading the main story “Start Quote

In a sense your money becomes pocket money and the bank becomes your parent”

End Quote Douglas Carswell MP for Clacton
Money Box asked other banks what their policy is on large cash withdrawals.
They all said they reserved the right to ask questions about large cash withdrawals.
But none of them said they would require evidence of what the money was being used for before paying out.
Douglas Carswell, the Conservative MP for Clacton, is alarmed by the new HSBC policy: "All these regulations which have been imposed on banks allow enormous interpretation. It basically infantilises the customer. In a sense your money becomes pocket money and the bank becomes your parent."
But Eric Leenders, head of retail at the British Bankers Association, said banks were sensible to ask questions of their customers: "I can understand it's frustrating for customers. But if you are making the occasional large cash withdrawal, the bank wants to make sure it's the right way to make the payment."
Money Box is broadcast on Saturdays at 12:00 BST on BBC Radio 4 and repeated on Sundays at 21:00 BST. You can listen again via the BBC iPlayer or by downloading Money Box podcast.
What has your experience been of trying to withdraw a large sum of cash from your bank? Let us know your views.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25861717

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...124_hsbc_0.png ....... Mr. Potter's giving 10 cents on the Dollar

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7212/7...8cbb444a_o.jpg

http://iacmusic.com/Uploads2/33769_1...an_cartoon.jpg

Second Major Banking Crash Imminent : HSBC Bank

Saturday, January 25, 2014 8:45
(Before It's News)

By Susan Duclos

Recent HSBC Bank actions are fueling concerns about a second imminent bank crash after they started restricting cash withdrawals from customers’ own bank accounts by informing them they had to provide proof of what they intended to use their own money for.

According a report by the BBC’s MoneyBox Programme, HSBC customers have gone to withdraw cash from their accounts, only to find HSBC would not release the funds. Customers were told to make a bank transfer instead, unless they provided documentation proving the intended use of the money. Stephen Cotton attempted a withdrawal and told the programme:
“When we presented them with the withdrawal slip, they declined to give us the money because we could not provide them with a satisfactory explanation for what the money was for. They wanted a letter from the person involved.”
Mr Cotton says the staff refused to tell him how much he could have: “So I wrote out a few slips. I said, ‘Can I have £5,000?’ They said no. I said, ‘Can I have £4,000?’ They said no. And then I wrote one out for £3,000 and they said, ‘OK, we’ll give you that.’ “

According to the article over at IACKNOWLEDGE, the major banks and states are preparing for a major crash as they buy up as much gold reserve as they can, indicating currency is at an all-time low.

Read there rest HERE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myKKG...layer_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIXKN2JGixM&feature=player_embedded


http://beforeitsnews.com/contributor...c_1015660b.jpg

Susan Duclos owns/writes Wake up America


http://beforeitsnews.com/economy/201...k-2589488.html

http://www.alipac.us/f19/max-keiser-...2/#post1391682

Prove it: Bank blocking some customers from making large withdrawals without ‘evidence’ of spending need

Saturday, January 25, 2014 22:12
(Before It's News)

Prove it: Bank blocking some customers from making large withdrawals without ‘evidence’ of spending need

By Eric Pfeiffer*

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/prove-it–bank-blocking-customers-from-making-large-withdrawals-without–evidence–of-spending-need-222425920.html

If you bank at HSBC in England, don’t plan on making any large cash withdrawals. At least not without a good explanation. Or, maybe even a permission slip.

That’s because a previously unannounced change in banking policy is blocking some customers from making large withdrawals without “evidence” explaining why they need the money from their accounts.

The policy affects customers attempting withdrawals for amounts as little as £5,000 ($8,253).

HSBC says it’s all done in the name of customer protection.
“The reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimize the opportunity for financial crime,” HSBC said in a statement. “However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal. We are writing to apologize to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced.”

The change in approach comes after the BBC aired reports from multiple HSBC customers who said they were denied in their recent attempts to make cash withdrawals.

Banking customer Stephen Cotton says he attempted to withdraw approximately $11,000 to repay a loan from his mother but was blocked from doing so.

“When we presented them with the withdrawal slip, they declined to give us the money because we could not provide them with a satisfactory explanation for what the money was for,” he told the BBC. “They wanted a letter from the person involved.”

Cotton says the bank wouldn’t even tell him how much he was allowed to withdraw under the new policy, which was not announced to customers when taking affect last November.

“So I wrote out a few slips. I said, 'Can I have £5,000?' They said no. I said, 'Can I have £4,000?' They said no. And then I wrote one out for £3,000 and they said, 'OK, we'll give you that.' “

In the U.S. there have been rumors of similar restrictions that major banks such as Citibank have denied. After the massive security breach at Target retail stores in December, JP Morgan did place a temporary limit on how much cash customers could withdraw from Chase ATM’s at Target stores and how much they could spend on their debit cards at one time. But that limit has since been removed.

A Conservative member of the British Parliament said the change in policy “infantilizes the customer.” However, the head of retail at the British Bankers Association defended the policy.
“I can understand it's frustrating for customers,” Eric Leenders told the BBC. “But if you are making the occasional large cash withdrawal, the bank wants to make sure it's the right way to make the payment.”

BBC
Margaret Jay was a producer & presenter for the BBC, and is a member of the House of Lords.

Note: House of Lordsis a house in the British Parliament.
BBC is the governing body for the BBC Trust.
Christopher Patten is the chairman for the BBC Trust, was a member of the House of Lords, and a co-chair for the International Crisis Group.
George Soros is a board member for the International Crisis Group, the founder & chairman for the Open Society Foundations, was the chairman for the Foundation to Promote Open Society, a founding sponsor for the Institute for New Economic Thinking, and a benefactor for the Human Rights Watch.
Open Society Foundations was a funder for the Human Rights Watch, the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), and the Institute for New Economic Thinking.
Foundation to Promote Open Society was a funder for the Human Rights Watch.
Syrian Electronic Army reportedly hacked the Human Rights Watch, and the BBC.
Bashar al-Assad is supporting the Syrian Electronic Army a hacker group, and the president of Syria.
John J. Studzinski is a director at the Atlantic Council of the United States (think tank), a director at the Human Rights Watch, and was a co-head of investment banking for HSBC Holdings plc.
Rachel Lomax is a director at the HSBC Holdings plc, and was the deputy governor for the Bank of England.
Adair Turner was a director at the Bank of England, and is a governing board member for the Institute for New Economic Thinking.
Anatole Kaletsky is a governing board chair for the Institute for New Economic Thinking, and the editor-at-large for the Times of London.
Winston Churchill II was a foreign correspondent for the Times of London, a member of the House of Commons, and Winston Churchill’s grandson.
House of Commons is a house in the British Parliament.
Winston Churchill was Winston Churchill II’s grandfather, the prime minister for the United Kingdom, and a member of the Order of Merit.
Nelson Mandela was an honorary member for the Order of Merit, and the founder & honorary elder for The Elders.
Martti Ahtisaari is a member of The Elders, and the chair emeritus for the International Crisis Group.
Kofi A. Annan is the chairman for The Elders, and a board member for the International Crisis Group.
Lakhdar Brahimi is a member of The Elders, and was a board member for the International Crisis Group.
George Soros is a board member for the International Crisis Group.
Christopher Patten was a co-chair for the International Crisis Group, a member of the House of Lords, and the chairman for the BBC Trust.
House of Lords is a house in the British Parliament.
BBC is the governing body for the BBC Trust.
Margaret Jay was a producer & presenter for the BBC, and is a member of the House of Lords.

Source: http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2014/01/prove-it-bank-blocking-some-customers.html

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-con...d-2795834.html

TIME BOMB

Bank Run Fears: Customers Being Forced to Provide Evidence For Why They Need Cash

Posted by SHTF Plan on Jan 26, 2014 in American Culture

http://joeforamerica.wpengine.netdna...1/bank-run.png

Follow Joe For America on Facebook!

In early 2013 the country of Cyprus locked down private banking accounts and restricted access to depositor funds. It was the first widely documented instance of a “bail-in,” as bank officials and European regulators determined that bad loans taken on by the banks were now the responsibility of the banks’ customers.

This led to a country-wide confiscation of 10% or more of all customer funds. In the heat of the Cyprian financial panic banks limited cash withdrawals to around $300 and ramped up security to prevent angry Cypriots from breaking down the doors.

What happened in Cyprus was big news all over the world, but within a few news cycles, once European and American officials assured the people it was a limited-scope event, the general population swept potential fears under the rug. No one really reported on the fact that the European Union quickly instituted new regulatory policies that would force bail-ins across the entire continent should such a crisis take hold again. Likewise, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke assured Americans that the crisis in Cyprus and Europe posed no risk to the US financial system, citing FDIC insurance for U.S. bank depositors as the safety net that would prevent a similar situation in the United States.

The United States, Europe, China and all of the world’s developed economies are, if officials are to be believed, completely immune to what happened in Cyprus. The current belief by the best and brightest is that these countries are simply too big to ever be faced with a total collapse of their banking systems.

But what if they were wrong? What if private debt reached such obscene levels that the loans taken on by lenders could never be repaid? What if a country like China, which holds trillions of dollars in cash reserves and has modern central banking regulations, did face such a problem?

Couldn’t happen, right?

http://joeforamerica.wpengine.netdna...un-300x256.jpg It turns out, that’s exactly what is happening right now, as Chinese banks struggle to cope with nearly $23 trillion worth of potentially bad loans.

Yes, that’s Trillion, with a “T.” The Chinese, it appears, have mimicked the exact set of circumstances that led to the 2008 crisis in America. Remember all of those empty cities and malls in China – they housed no people or shopping venues, yet cost billions of dollars to develop? It looks like all those bridges to nowhere are catching up with the Chinese. And the panic has begun, as evidenced by capital controls and restrictive withdrawal policies now being implemented by one of the largest banks in the world all across China.

Want to know how a bank run starts? Look no further:

HSBC is imposing restrictions on large cash withdrawals raising a number of red flags. The BBC reports that some HSBC customers have been prevented from withdrawing large amounts of cash because they could not provide evidence of why they wanted it. HSBC admitted it has not informed customers of the change in policy, which was implemented in November for their own good: “We ask our customers about the purpose of large cash withdrawals when they are unusual… the reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime.” As one customer responded: “you shouldn’t have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It’s not theirs, it’s yours.”

“When we presented them with the withdrawal slip, they declined to give us the money because we could not provide them with a satisfactory explanation for what the money was for. They wanted a letter from the person involved.”

Mr Cotton says the staff refused to tell him how much he could have: “So I wrote out a few slips. I said, ‘Can I have £5,000?’ They said no. I said, ‘Can I have £4,000?’ They said no. And then I wrote one out for £3,000 and they said, ‘OK, we’ll give you that.’ “

He asked if he could return later that day to withdraw another £3,000, but he was told he could not do the same thing twice in one day.
…

Mr Cotton cannot understand HSBC’s attitude: “I’ve been banking in that bank for 28 years. They all know me in there. You shouldn’t have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It’s not theirs, it’s yours.”

Via: Zero Hedge

As in China, the debt party in the United States has returned in force. We are now very close to the same levels of personal and commercial debt as we saw prior to the crash of ’08, but rather than being concerned the experts say don’t fight it, embrace it.

But as is the case in China, the debt party will soon be coming to an end in the United States as tens of millions of Americans see their wealth and jobs wiped out. Like the people of China who took on loans they can’t repay, Americans are under the gun. And in the near future, the same credit problems that gripped the world before will do so again. And this time we’ll be footing the bill directly from our bank accounts (rather than the Federal Reserve’s printing presses).

We may not yet have official regulatory or bank policies for restricting cash withdrawals here in the USA, but just try to head to your local bank and withdraw $5000 or $10,000 and see what happens. You will invariably be met with stares from bank employees and questions about your intentions and why you need that much cash.

We’ve already seen how fast they can lock down the entire banking system. It’ll only take a push of a button and everything you think you have in your personal bank account could be seized.

But then again, as Ben Bernanke has said previously, there is no risk to the financial system. Moreover, the FDIC has insured your money, so if something does go wrong with the American banking system, all of your losses are totally covered by the roughly$50 billion in FDIC reserves. That should be plenty of money to handle the $9 trillion in US-based domestic customer deposits, plus the $300 trillion in derivatives bets made by the banks.

So, no need to worry, because the government’s got your back (and they would NEVER think of using your deposited funds to offset any bank losses).

But even though it is impossible to conceive that such a thing might happen we recommend preparing for it just in case. We know FEMA will be there to provide emergency cash, food and recovery tents. But in the off chance the credit system locks up again, ATM’s are limited to minimal withdrawals, and the banks do seize your money you might want to have some food, supplies, gold, and reserve cash on hand.

We realize such a thing could never happen – not in the world’s most developed and richest economy. Ben Bernanke, Janet Yellen, government officials and TV pundits say it can’t. So, these extra supplies would be just for fun and entertainment – something to show friends and family when they come over so you can have a laugh about all these crazy Doomsday scenarios.

http://joeforamerica.com/2014/01/ban...nce-need-cash/

http://www.drudgereport.com/i/logo9.gif


Bank-Run Fears Continue; HSBC Restricts Large Cash Withdrawals...

Must present 'evidence' of spending need...




http://drudgereport.com/

First HSBC Halts Large Withdrawals, Now Lloyds ATMs Stop Working

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/26/2014 14:43 -0500

Update: things are back to normal - Lloyds will gladly accept your deposits again:

First HSBC bungles up an attempt at pseudo-capital controls by explaining that large cash withdrawals need a justification, and are limited in order "to protect our customers" (from what - their money?), which will likely result in even faster deposit withdrawals, and now another major UK bank - Lloyds/TSB - has admitted it are experiencing cash separation anxiety manifesting itself in ATMs failing to work and a difficult in paying using debit cards. Sky reports that customers of Lloyds and TSB, as well as those with Halifax, have reported difficulties paying for goods in shops and getting money out of ATMs.

All three banks are under the Lloyds Banking Group which said: "We are aware that some customers are unable to use their debit cards either to make purchases or to withdraw money from ATMs. "We are working hard to resolve this as swiftly as possible and apologise for any inconvenience caused."

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...oyds%20ATM.jpg

Further from SkyNews, TSB, which operates as a separate business within the group, issued a statement saying: "We are aware that some TSB customers are unable to use their debit cards either to make purchases or to withdraw money from ATMs. "This has impacted all Lloyds Banking Group brands. We are working hard to resolve this and unreservedly apologise for any inconvenience caused."

TSB chief executive Paul Pester said in a tweet: "My apologies to TSB customers having problems with their cards. I'm working hard with my team now to try to fix the problems."

Clients were not happy:

On the microblogging site, one TSB customer Nicky Kate said: "Really embarrassed to get my card declined while out shopping, never had any problems with lloyds then they changed my account."

Hannah Smith: "I am a TSB customer with a Lloyds card still (like everyone else). And I've been embarrassed three times today re: card declined."

Another customer Julia Abbott ‏said: "Lloyds bank atm and card service down. 20 mins on hold to be told this. Nothing even on website. Shoddy lloyds. ... shoddy."

Helen Needham ‏said: "#lloyds bank having problems with there card service... Can't pay for anything or get money out!"

Another Twitter user wrote: "This problem is also affecting Halifax debit cards as I found out trying to pay for lunch with my wife!"

And Jane Lucy Jones tweeted Halifax, saying: "Why can't I get any money out of any cashpoints, what is going on?

What is going on is known as a "glitch" for now, and perhaps as "preemptive planning" depending on who you ask. Sure, in a few months in may be called a bail-in (see Cyprus), but we will cross that bridge when we get to it.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...s-stop-working

Second Major Banking Crash Imminent : HSBC Bank

Saturday, January 25, 2014 8:45
(Before It's News) By Susan Duclos

Recent HSBC Bank actions are fueling concerns about a second imminent bank crash after they started restricting cash withdrawals from customers’ own bank accounts by informing them they had to provide proof of what they intended to use their own money for.

According a report by the BBC’s MoneyBox Programme, HSBC customers have gone to withdraw cash from their accounts, only to find HSBC would not release the funds. Customers were told to make a bank transfer instead, unless they provided documentation proving the intended use of the money. Stephen Cotton attempted a withdrawal and told the programme:
“When we presented them with the withdrawal slip, they declined to give us the money because we could not provide them with a satisfactory explanation for what the money was for. They wanted a letter from the person involved.”
Mr Cotton says the staff refused to tell him how much he could have: “So I wrote out a few slips. I said, ‘Can I have £5,000?’ They said no. I said, ‘Can I have £4,000?’ They said no. And then I wrote one out for £3,000 and they said, ‘OK, we’ll give you that.’ “

According to the article over at IACKNOWLEDGE, the major banks and states are preparing for a major crash as they buy up as much gold reserve as they can, indicating currency is at an all-time low.

Read there rest HERE.



http://beforeitsnews.com/economy/201...k-2589488.html

HSBC and Chase Send Clear Signals That a Bank Run Is Near:

RBS hit with £3bn bill as hopes slide for sell-off before election: Bank faces huge new mis-selling scandal

• Predicted £8billion loss is bank's biggest since £24billion loss in 2008
• Forced to set £3billion aside for expected costs for legal actions
• Mis-sold thousands of policies linked to the mortgage market
• Almost certainly dashed hopes of partially re-privatising before next year
  

By ROB DAVIES
PUBLISHED: 18:40 EST, 27 January 2014 | UPDATED: 18:40 EST, 27 January 2014
66 shares
72 View comments


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/...19_306x423.jpg+4

Scandal: Hopes of partially re-privatising the bank before next year's election have been almost certainly dashed by expected £3billion legal costs

Royal Bank of Scotland is on course for its largest loss since the crash because of blunders under former boss Fred ‘the Shred’ Goodwin.
It is having to set aside £3billion to cover expected costs for legal actions and compensation for mis-selling thousands of policies.
The massive black hole illustrates the long-lasting damage done by Goodwin’s leadership before the bank was bailed out with £45billion of taxpayers’ money in 2008.
RBS is now on course to lose around £8billion this year, its biggest deficit since its record £24billion loss more than five years ago.
Well-placed sources say Tory hopes of delivering a vote-winning move by partially re-privatising the bank before next year’s general election were now almost certainly dashed.
Most of the new costs stem from products linked to the mortgage market, which were at the heart of the financial crisis in 2008.
Nearly £2billion has been set aside to cover legal action brought by US victims of these disastrous investments.
The bank is also setting aside nearly £500million to cover continuing compensation claims for mis-selling of PPI loan insurance, and a further £500million to pay compensation for ‘interest rate swaps’ that were sold to small firms that did not need them.

More...

• Hopes fade for RBS flotation as bank heads for £8bn loss after setting aside £3bn for claims
• Rescue struggle: Co-op Bank float likely to be delayed until late 2014
• Backlash on rip-off fee-paying bank accounts: Thousands of customers complain over claims they were widely mis-sold

This takes the total of new charges to nearly £3billion, and the bank said this may not be the end to fines, settlements and other penalties.

The bank’s eight-strong executive committee said it would forgo bonuses this year. They were awarded a combined £6.5million in bonuses last year.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/...72_306x423.jpg+4


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/...86_306x423.jpghttp://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/furniture...mera_90x68.png+4



Recovery: Ross McEwan, chief executive of RBS (left), says the bank is paying for past mistakes. The black hole illustrates the long-lasting damage done by former chief executive Fred 'the Shred' Goodwin (right)


RBS’s chief executive Ross McEwan, who took over from Stephen Hester at the start of October 2013, said the bank and its directors were paying the price for past errors.
‘I know this team is not responsible for past mistakes but we are running the company and have to show we take accountability seriously,’ he said. ‘Fronting up to our past mistakes is very expensive, but RBS is now a stronger bank.’
He did not name Mr Goodwin, who in 2012 was stripped of the knighthood given to him by Gordon Brown.
But he blamed the aggressive expansionism of the bank, one of its key characteristics under Mr Goodwin’s leadership.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/...02_634x468.jpg+4

Plans: Mr McEwan has been in talks with the chancellor since he assumed the role in a bid to recover RBS

‘We had a very large business that was in far too many markets and product groups,’ said Mr McEwan.
‘The scale of the bad decisions during that period means that some problems are still just emerging,’ he said.
RBS has been at the centre of a string of scandals that have cost the bank – still 81 per cent owned by taxpayers – billions in fines and settlements.
It has already paid out £2.2billion on PPI loan insurance, £750million for interest rate swaps and £390million for its role in the Libor scandal and some £60million for violating US sanctions.
Andrew Tyrie, chairman of the Treasury select committee, said he hoped the bank would not rein in lending to small firms to protect its balance sheet.
He said RBS was a perfect example of why the Government should legislate to ensure bonuses can be ‘clawed back’ from misbehaving bankers.

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...g-scandal.html

NOW BANK DECIDES IF YOU CAN HAVE YOUR MONEY

Uproar as account confiscations loom over decision

JEROME R. CORSI
01/27/2014
NEW YORK – Think your bank deposits are safe, just because the FDIC now insures accounts up to $250,000?

Better think again.

Until customer complaints forced a reversal of policy, the British multinational bank HSBC unilaterally imposed a restriction blocking customers from withdrawing large amounts of money from their own accounts, unless they could provide the bank with a “good reason” for it.
After the uproar in London when the BBC reported the new policy, HSBC issued a statement claiming the concern was money laundering. The bank notified customers that it would “not necessarily” deny depositors the ability to withdraw large amounts of cash from their accounts.

The HSBC explained in its statement that it has “an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimize the opportunity for financial crime.”
“However, following feedback, we are immediately updating guidance to our customer-facing staff to reiterate that it is not mandatory for customers to provide documentary evidence for large cash withdrawals, and on its own, failure to show evidence is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal,” HSBC said. “We are writing to apologize to any customer who has been given incorrect information and inconvenienced.”

The bank’s motivation may have stemmed from reports leaking out of Washington that U.S. regulators continue to find HSBC has failed to implement required measures to prevent money laundering amid fears that its weakened financial position might cause a run on the bank. The Comptroller of the Currency made the demand after HSBC was forced in December 2012 to pay a record fine of $1.9 billion in lieu of criminal charges. WND broke the blockbuster story that HSBC was widely engaged in laundering billions of dollars in conjunction with known criminal cartel drug lords and suspected terrorists.

The shocking series of WND stories beginning in February 2012 drew the attention of the Department of Homeland Security in New York and the Senate Permanent Subcommittee. WND reported on the 1,000 pages of bank records a former account relationship manager with the HSBC southern New York region brought exclusively to WND. The evidence showed the global banking giant was money-laundering billions of dollars using the Social Security numbers of current and former bank customers to create bogus proxy bank accounts to deposit and transfer internationally the illegal funds, unbeknownst to the account holders.

Federal Reserve investigations in 2012 found HSBC’s drug-related and terrorist-connected money-laundering violations included managing $19.4 billion in transactions for the Iranian government while Iran was under U.N.-imposed economic sanctions. The bank also was accused of making $7 billion in banknote transfers, most of which were drug-cartel related, from an HSBC branch in Mexico to an HSBC branch in the United States.

Remarkably, in a statement published by the Guardian of London in December 2012, Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer admitted the Obama administration Justice Department had concluded HSBC was too big to prosecute.

At a New York press conference, Breuer said that despite HSBC’s “blatant failure” to implement anti-money laundering controls and its willful disregard of U.S. sanctions, the $1.9 billion civil fine was preferable to the “dire consequences” of taking the bank to court.
The Guardian noted that had Justice Department prosecutors decided to press charges, HSBC would almost certainly have lost its banking license, “and the future of the institution would have been under threat and the entire banking system would have been destabilized.”
HSBC said it was “profoundly sorry” for what it called “past mistakes” that allowed terrorists, drug cartels and rogue nations like Iran to move billions around the international financial system while circumventing U.S. banking laws.

The Guardian noted HSBC processed for Mexico’s Sinaloa cartel, regarded then as the most powerful and deadly drug gang in the world, some $881 billion in drug trafficking money laundered through its accounts in the United States and worldwide.

In July 2012, WND published an analysis of Federal Election Commission records proving HSBC since 1997, the first year FEC electronic records were available, had generously donated millions of dollars to both Democrat and Republican members of the House of Representatives and the Senate who held committee assignments in which they oversaw banking and financial services regulation.
HSBC’s troubles as a rogue bank did not end there.

Last August, Reuters reported the London-based HSBC had earnings seriously depressed after announcing it had to reserve $1.6 billion for an anticipated settlement with the Federal Housing Finance Authority in Washington. The U.S. demanded reparations for HSBC for violating banking laws, this time by misrepresenting the quality of the collateral mortgage-backed securities bonds the bank aggressively but fraudulently marketed between 2005 and 2008.

Then, in October, Reuters reported HSBC had been ordered to pay some $2.46 billion to settle a class action lawsuit that charged Household International Inc., now HSBC Finance Corp., with fraudulently misleading investors about its predatory lending practices, the quality of its loans and the accuracy of its financial accounting from March 23, 2001, through Oct. 11, 2002.

When HSBC acquired Household International in 2003, the acquisition made HSBC the largest subprime lender in the U.S. at the time. HSBC played a major role in the housing industry bubble that finally burst with disastrous economic consequences in 2008 at the end of George W. Bush’s second term as president.

On Jan. 14, the Wall Street Journal’s Market Watch reported shares of HSBC Holdings fell 1.42 percent following a report HSBC may have overstated bank assets by as much as $92 billion.

Market Watch further reported analysts calculated HSBC may need to raise between $58 billion to $111 billion to continue operations. The analysts warned HSBC could be forced to cut or suspend dividends to meet the capital-raising goals.

In October 2013, WND reported a decision by banks in Cyprus not to allow customers to withdraw deposits preceded a government-imposed “bail-in” in which the Cypriot banking system agreed to confiscate up to 10 percent of customer deposits. The move was designed to recapitalize the nation’s ailing banking system, as required by the IMF as a precondition to obtaining an emergency Eurozone loan of 10 billion euros.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/now-bank-...GHtI7YwqtaL.99

http://www.alipac.us/f19/bank-run-fe...rawals-296493/

RBS £8 Billion Loss Shows Risk In UK Banking System

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...ture-44273.jpg Submitted by GoldCore on 01/29/2014 17:11 -0500

Today’s AM fix was USD 1,254.75, EUR 917.89 and GBP 756.42 per ounce.
Yesterday’s AM fix was USD 1,253.50, EUR 919.12 and GBP 757.04 per ounce.
Gold and silver rose by more than 1% on the COMEX today. Gold was $15.70 higher to $1,269.80 per ounce and silver rose $0.20 to $19.78/oz.
Traders eagerly await news from the Fed. The recent tapering of the central bank’s bond-buying program by $10 billion to $75 billion a month is already largely priced into the market contrary to much idle speculation.

Most physical buyers will ignore the noise and focus on the fact that the Fed’s monetary policies, along with most central banks in the world, remain extraordinarily accommodative even after the recent $10 billion taper.
They are likely to continue accumulating until they see an actual, real tightening in monetary policies and an actual end to quantitative easing.Traders eagerly await news from the Fed’s policy announcement on Wednesday. The recent tapering of the central bank’s bond-buying program by $10 billion to $75 billion a month is already largely priced into the market.
The smart money is either continuing to accumulate physical or transporting already purchased bullion from storage in the U.S., Canada, Europe and other western countries to storage in Singapore. Indeed, some are selling holdings in the West and rebuying bullion for storage in Hong Kong and Singapore.
Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) is heading for an £8 billion loss for 2013 and yet it is rewarding senior executives massive bonuses despite losses. It will have to lay aside nearly $5 billion to cover potential litigation claims related to mortgage-backed securities and other high risk products sold before the financial crisis. Its poorly served clients have had frequent IT and computer technical problems and there have been found to be gouging some of their business clients who have found themselves in financial difficulty. Recent days have seen allegations of currency price fixing.
http://www.ifamagazine.com/wp-conten...S-building.jpg
RBS is to stop providing dozens of currency benchmarks, as regulatory rate rigging probes raise doubts about the integrity of daily price fixings in the global foreign exchange and gold markets.
In a memo to clients, the bank said that it would limit its offering of foreign exchange benchmarks to a handful of price fixings, and that it would wind down its internal benchmark, called RBS Fix.
Nearly six years after the financial crisis and its massive bailout, it looks like business as usual by the bankers in RBS and in the City of London and Wall Street.
Find out why Singapore is now one of the safest places in the world to store gold in our latest gold guide -
The Essential Guide To Storing Gold In Singapore

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed...banking-system

HSBC and Chase Send Clear Signals That a Bank Run Is Near

January 27, 2014 - Activism, Featured, Main - Tagged: bank holiday, bank run, crony capitalism, dave hodges, false flag, goldman sachs, new world order, obama, police state, prepping, the common sense show,tyranny

Dave Hodges
January 27, 2014
The Common Sense Show

http://thecommonsenseshow.com/siteup...1/bank-run.jpg

Can you find yourself in the picture?

The HSBC bank is limiting withdrawals in both the United States and in Britain.
For the life of me, I have no idea why anyone would want to bank in this criminal enterprise bank. Regardless, isn’t the money your money? Shouldn’t you be able to do with your money what you want without justifying the purpose to the bank that you designate to hold your money?
John Cruz is a former vice president and relationship manager at HSBC. Cruz has made two guest appearances on The Common Sense Show in which he alleged that he uncovered that HSBC was laundering money for the Mexican drug cartels through phony shell corporations. He brought this to the attention of his supervisors at HSBC and was told to “leave it alone”. When he did not leave it alone, he was fired. Cruz went to prosecutors in the New York City area. They acknowledged that they knew what was going at HSBC, but they refused to investigate and prosecute and DHS and the FBI told Cruz the same thing.

The Cruz revelations leave no doubt that the entire banking system is nothing but a criminal enterprise system.

The Banking System Is Nearing Collapse

HSBC has admitted that it has not informed customers of the change in policy which allows the bank to deny customer withdrawals of cash from their own account. This policy was implemented in November of 2013.
This development at HSBC should raise red flags for everyone, not just HSBC customers, because in the same time frame, JP Morgan Chase announced an identical policy. As a result, many financial analysts are predicting a bank run in the near future and this is the primary strategy of the banks as they are obviously bracing for an economic collapse.
This illegal withholding of bank customer funds is justified by Eric Leenders, the present head of retail at the British Bankers Association. Leenders states that the banks are just being sensible to ask questions as to what the money is for and then make a subsequent decision on whether to release the funds to the account holder. Leenders stated that “I can understand it’s frustrating for customers. But if you are making the occasional large cash withdrawal, the bank wants to make sure it’s the right way to make the payment.” I would agree with Mr. Leenders in that the theft of customer money by a supposed trusted bank is indeed frustrating.

Sending a Clear Message

Clearly, this is a portend of things to come. If the banks were on sound financial footing, account holders would not see any such restrictions. However, if you knew if a bank crash was coming, wouldn’t you make sure your bank was as liquid as possible? To the banks, being liquid and cautious in these perilous times means that the banks intend on making it very difficult for their customers to gain access to their money.
These are the chest pains before the heart attack. Take your money out of the bank while you still can.

An Ominous Development

When the banking collapse happens, it will not be American bankers that will gobble up your life savings, pensions, 401K’s and IRA’s. It will be the Chinese.
Isn’t it interesting that JP Morgan Chase has sold their property located at One Chase Manhattan Plaza skyscraper to Fosun International, a Chinese investment firm, for $725 million. This is only the latest in a series of New York real estate purchases by Chinese investors.
It is time to connect the dots.

Just the Facts Ma’am

Fact, the American economy is in freefall.
Fact, the Chinese have purchased a large portion of our debt.
Fact, if the Chinese do not position themselves to acquire America’s hard assets before the crash, they will be left holding useless paper.
Fact, your house is a hard asset and the paper note is owned by the bank.
Fact, the Chinese not only make your clothes and most of your personal possessions, the Chinese will be calling in the loans on your homes before the crash, once they acquire more of our banks.
Fact, if a person does not think that your home is not at risk of being taken, then that person does not understand basic finance and they have obviously never heard of the MERS mortgage fraud.

Fact, the government has begun stealing everyone’s 401K and retirement plans from their previous allocations and converting them to buying U.S. government bonds and who owns the lion’s share of the bonds? Chinese take-out anyone?
Fact, many have been reporting that Hillary Clinton has been collateralizing American home mortgages, office buildings, land, public holdings and mineral assets to the Chinese so that they will continue, for a short time, to continue to purchase our debt.
Fact, it would be wise to learn Mandarin Chinese so that you can more effectively communicate with your soon-to-be slave masters.

Welcome to the Old West, Chinese Style

Are you familiar with the term “Company Town”? This is a phrase that was primarily reserved for towns in the “Old West” in places like Bisbee, Arizona. The mining company in Bisbee owned everything. The owned the mine where the people worked. They owned the homes where the people lived. They owned the drug stores. They owned the Grocery stores. In short, they owned it all! I fear that this is the new reality under which we will soon be living in which the Chinese will own everything.
One interesting side note has to do with a historical event called the Bisbee Deportation. The event was precipitated by miners who thought they would protest dangerous working conditions and substandard living quarters. The owners of the company town responded to worker demands by forcing the dissenters into trains and then transported the protesters to the deserts of New Mexico and were forced off of the train in the middle of nowhere. In the near future, I do not think the Chinese will transport dissenters to the desert, the new destination will consist of barb wire facing in and the word FEMA will be imprinted on the sign outside the destination.

Conclusion

What name would you give a system of economics and government where corporate entities own all of the property? I would call it modern day feudalism.
I can best sum up these events in the words of Johnny Cash, “I hear the train acomin’ it’s rollin’ round the bend and I ain’t seen the sunshine since I don’t know when…”

http://thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/0...k-run-is-near/

This is nothing new. Many banks have tried before to limit how much people could withdraw out of their accounts before and many banks have paid high prices for such. Back many years ago in the late 90's a friend of mine was trying to make a large withdrawl from his local bank branch (same bank I had at the time). The bank told him he couldn't withdraw that much in a day because they had maximum daily withdrawl limits. Well he talked to the manager who said the same thing so he closed out his account which of course the bank didn't care as he was a smaller account and looking to take out only a few thousand. However the woman behind him in line was an elderly well known rich woman in town saw what was going on so talked to the manager after that who informed her that's the banks new policy. She promptly closed out her account which was in the millions. Not much for a big time bank maybe but a small local bank can't afford those sort of mistakes.