That’s sort of how financial services works. It’s ALL paper trails. Paper trails and assessing risk.
Everyone thinks it’s all Gordon Gekko Wolf of Wall Street cowboy shit with coked up bankers making big deals in the strip club and heading out to the Hamptons.
You don’t “somehow lose” a hundred million dollars. You can be damn sure someone is going to start asking questions:
When you lent that money, what proof did you have they would be able to pay it back?
Did you verify that proof?
Did you take any collateral?
Did you verify the collateral?
What are the market forecasts?
What are your contingencies if X does Y?
And by the way do you have all the paperwork that proves all this?
So yeah. It IS about generating a paper trail claiming that you followed your due diligence procedures. Because WHEN something goes wrong (the market moves unexpectedly, someone defaults on a loan, an earthquake renders you insolvent, someone commits or accuses someone else of fraud), that paper trail determines who SHOULD be sued or prosecuted or fired and who just gets to write it off as an unforeseen loss.
Last year i wanted to lend my daughter a five figure sum as a bridging loan for a house move. her solicitor was most aggressive in demanding to know where the money came from
In the USA at least, lenders are real picky about loans like that.
They made a decision about their loan based on what they knew of your indebtedness. You suddenly adding a bunch more as a bridge, or a down payment source or whatever, at the last minute is a Big Deal. As in a showstopper. Even if the loan comes from the “Bank of Mom & Dad” and is only squishily meant to be repaid.
The main mortgage lender(s) desperately wants you the debtor to have made a significant down payment with your own funds so you have skin in the game from the git-go. There certainly are no-down required loans out there for special circumstances. But they’re not the default. At least not in the USA.
The solicitor where you are in the UK may have been concerned about some similar aspect, rather than that the source of funds was criminal.
And in the USA, even if it’s a gift, the lender is going to want a letter documenting that it’s a gift, that repayment is not expected and probably a statement of the relationship between the parties. ( Which I’m sure discourages a lot of potential loans)
I assume the 4% surcharge is the mechanic passing along the charge that he has to pay to accept credit card payments. That wouldn’t be an issue with a check.
So there’s 3 US Federal banking policies that govern cash transaction record keeping, via the Banking Secrecy Act.
Withdrawals or deposits of at least $10,000 creates a Currency Transaction Report. They have to ask a bunch of questions, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to do this, it should not put you name on a list, especially because cash-heavy businesses do it all the time.
Exchange of at least $3,000 to <$10,000 cash into our out of a money order, cashier’s check, etc creates a Monetary Instrument Log. Similar story.
Something that’s actually suspicious creates a Suspicious Activity Report. Again, may be nothing, but is automatically or voluntarily created by the bank. Suspicious things include multiple cash transactions on the same day during different events that may exceed $10,000, taking out some amount just under $10k, or similar.
Doesn’t sound like 1 applies to OP, maybe not 2 as no checks are mentioned. 3 is a possibility, but unless OP did other transactions that day it should not. Could be bank policy, but really nothing to worry about. They could be made to enhance a case or add additional charges to a criminal or civil trial, but aren’t going to put you on any lists. At least ones the government isn’t already maintaining.
We recently got a call from a bank concerned when an older relative of ours visited a bank with his care-giver. Apparently banks are also watching over “vulnerable clients” (which probably doesn’t affect this OP, but it’s a related topic)
But even if automatically generated, a SAR goes thru at least two levels of actual humans before being sent to FinCEN.
But in this case, what it sounds like is that a Regulator found that the bank was letting too many (what appeared to be) fraud transactions go thru, so they did a Memorandum of Understanding, so the bank added that to is KYC regs. That sort of MoU seems pretty standard now, and even if a Bank didnt get one, they likely saw the “handwriting on the wall” and went ahead and added it themselves.
Scam protection is a plausible cover story. The REAL reason is our Plutocratic Government doesn’t like people using cash, because cash purchases can’t be tracked like card purchases are. How is anyone supposed to direct market to you when your purchases are unknown? Cash is subversive.
In my part of the city at least, $ 100 bills are viewed with incredible suspicion. $50s, not nearly so much. Most small businesses on the avenue have paper signs on the register or counter next to them that read, “$20 bills or lower accepted”, or words to that effect.
Having dealt with the utter nightmare that is a Check-Washing Scam, I now view my checks as the single most dangerous way to pay someone. I hand you $ 4,000 in cash? You count it out? We’re solid. Now, it’s true that someone could walk up to you a moment later with a gun and rob you of that money. Otherwise, we’re good to go. My Dearly Beloved™ and I rarely write a check, month to month.
And-- an amusing story related to the use of Western Union referred to up-thread.
When I was just starting out, I worked as a P.A. – Production Assistant-- on film sets. At some point, I moved up the ladder. Hadn’t really PA’d in a while. Out of the blue, my boy Loucas calls me up. HE was a Key Grip on my first job and had moved up to Executive Producer, etc etc.
He was producing a music video in NJ. Shooting at the (much-mourned Capitol Theater in Passaic). " I know you’re not working as a PA any more. But I don’t know anyone on the crew enough to trust them. The music label is wiring in ten thousand dollars in cash which I’ll use to pay for some of the shoot. Can you work for me for 2 days as a PA, so I can send you into NYC to the Times Square office of Western Union? They will have the bills already bundled, all $ 20s. I’ll pay you an outrageous rate as a PA !! "
I said sure thing. But he HAD to send me in with another PA who would be behind the wheel.
It was like something out of a bank heist. Now, mind you this was the autumn of 1985. We drove in through the Lincoln Tunnel, he parked. I ran in with my ID and the Wire Transfer code info. Man behind the counter knew someone would be coming for it.
It was literally stuffed into a canvas sack. It was early on a Saturday morning and there were various people who were there to cash their Social Security checks and such. And me. With a huge bag of cash. I signed for it, turned and ran out of the storefront. Jumped into the car and yelled GET us outa here !!!
I’m sure that’s part of it. But there are also laws and a bank’s own regulations intended to thwart things like drug trafficking and money laundering. Asking for $4000 in cash is definitely unusual and I wouldn’t be upset with the bank for asking questions, especially since we live in a world that is increasingly cashless but at the same time increasingly infested with scammers and other nefarious activity.
When I sold my previous house I vaguely recall having to sign something that was connected to an anti-money-laundering law. I think it was probably because there was a two-week gap between the closing on the old house and the closing on the new one, so I was issued a lawyer’s cheque for an enormous amount that I clutched in my paws with an awesome fierceness on the way to the bank!
Yes, this, although “duty of care” can be interpreted as legalese for “avoiding legal liability” which could be a problem for them if they’re sued for engaging in an unusual and inherently suspicious transaction without asking questions.
