Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Email this1:14 pm
December 20, 2019
Offline
The article is a year old but has merit, I was thinking about it for a spell and couldn't help chuckling. Yes most people have one bank they deal with and being debanked would be an enormous task.
That said I have accounts at most banks and a lot of credit unions so debanking by a single entity would be a mild bleep for at the worst.
I bet most people on this forum would feel the same, we would simply move on to one of our other accounts while the general public would be devastated by the loss of their bank.
2:34 pm
October 27, 2013
Offline
The general public is not likely the behaviour type that would be debanked. Only attempted criminal activity would likely be cause for debanking, such as use of an account for criminal activities including fraud, ripping off a bank such as trying to pass a bad cheque and making an ATM withdrawal at same time, etc. Probably well deserved and should be blacklisted across the banking universe, not unlike getting on the 'no fly' list.
3:29 pm
January 12, 2019
Offline
.
Over 800 Canadians 'Debanked' in ~ 4 years. 
Must be a lota Bad Actors, out there !
- Dean
" Live Long, Healthy ... And Prosper! "
5:04 pm
April 14, 2021
Offline
AltaRed said
Probably well deserved and should be blacklisted across the banking universe, not unlike getting on the 'no fly' list.
That is the concern not to be over-looked. If one bank removes you as a member, others are likely to do the same for the same reason, sooner or later. If that reason is unfounded, the sooner the situation is cleared, the better it will be for the member. Otherwise, it can spread throughout the industry. When someone is banned by a Vegas casino, they are banned from all casinos. They share notes.
9:09 pm
October 27, 2013
Offline
I don't think banks can talk to one another about identifying bad apples being tossed for privacy reasons, so a ban at one FI does not mean a ban at all FIs, but of course bad apples eventually run out of banks to bank at.
Another reason I say that is I have family members in retail banking and account holders are shown the door (with a cheque equal to account holdings) on a fairly regular basis for trying to pull fast ones (violating Terms and Conditions). If what I have heard is true, it would be more like 8000, or even 80000, people being debanked over 6 years. Unless what I heard was hyperbole/exaggeration, it appears to be a continuous battle by retail bank branches.
11:55 am
April 14, 2021
Offline
AltaRed said
I don't think banks can talk to one another about identifying bad apples being tossed for privacy reasons, so a ban at one FI does not mean a ban at all FIs, but of course bad apples eventually run out of banks to bank at.
You are correct in that banks cannot discuss individual details for specific customers. However, as an industry, like any other industry, workers talk at conferences or change jobs within the industry. If one bank starts to remove suspicious/problematic accounts for a certain reason, other banks will soon hear about the practice and will likely adopt the same or similar practice.
12:03 pm
December 20, 2019
Offline
There are many stories if you google it about regular people getting debanked and the bank tells them to find another bank. These people always find another but I think one of the more famous cases was Nigel Farage in the UK.
Like I said, if you have several working accounts at a few different financial institutions you should be relatively safe.
12:20 pm
April 6, 2013
Offline
AltaRed said
…
Another reason I say that is I have family members in retail banking and account holders are shown the door (with a cheque equal to account holdings) on a fairly regular basis for trying to pull fast ones (violating Terms and Conditions). If what I have heard is true, it would be more like 8000, or even 80000, people being debanked over 6 years. Unless what I heard was hyperbole/exaggeration, it appears to be a continuous battle by retail bank branches.
The number is likely much higher than 800. Financial Consumer Agency of Canada isn't going know about cases where the customer doesn't file a complaint after being told to take their banking elsewhere. Customer isn't going to file a complaint if he/she was caught doing something they know they should not have been doing.
Contrary to the Toronto Sun article, banks can and do close accounts for reasons other than suspected criminality.
1:10 pm
January 12, 2019
Offline
.
KamWest's link in post #7 ⬆ gives a good example of a 'Debanking', that doesn't involve criminal/illegal activity.
- Dean
" Live Long, Healthy ... And Prosper! "
1:44 pm
September 29, 2017
Offline
Yes, for those who do not know, both debanking and the "no fly" list are highly politicized affairs.
2:54 pm
January 25, 2024
Offline
'Big bank' was major FI (bill payments, salary deposits, etc.) for my friend for years.
One day friend received substantial amount of money (few 100k) from his brother in order to close home purchase. Funds have been transferred from Tangerine to 'big bank' (link existed for years Tang 'big bank'). House has been purchased, deal closed.
Then 'big bank' closed ALL friend's accounts with no explanation or if you really look at the letter from 'big bank' they suspected illegal activity... No matter how many documents friend presented to the 'big bank' they refused to even discuss the matter.
Included documents were: every deposit and source of funds friend's brother made to his Tang account, list of personal and joint brother's accounts and transactions from time to time back and forth, house purchase agreement, etc.
6:58 pm
September 11, 2013
Offline
CAD, you say there was no explanation, then you say if you "really" read their letter they suspect illegal activity - ?
Anyway, they don't have to provide an explanation. They don't want to see documents, they didn't ask for that, so recourse is to follow the bank's complaint settlement process and, if unsatisfied, then go to ombudsman (obsi.ca), or else just move on.
There's more to the story maybe that you don't know (maybe your friend has a history of violating t&c as AltaRed referred to earlier) and they used these large transfers as an excuse to terminate the relationship, otherwise the only conclusion is they closed the account for no reason, they just randomly close accounts, and that doesn't really happen.
6:24 am
April 6, 2013
Offline
The Big Bank could have been suspicious about such a large sum (few $100,000) being transferred in from a friend's account at a small bank (Tangerine Bank). Such a sum may have been inconsistent with what they knew about the friend.
When they investigated further, the anti-money laundering people at the Big Bank found signs that the funds from the Tangerine Bank account were from another party and not from the friend, the named account holder!
If there was also no charge placed on the property to secure the few $100,000 lent by the brother, no declaration that a few $100,000 of the down payment was a gift from the brother, and no mention of the brother in the title of the property, then it would appear that the friend was hiding the brother's involvment in the transaction and there is an undisclosed arrangement between the friend and another party.
The Big Bank then decided the friend was risky from a money laundering/terrorist financing point of view and ended the relationship.
Please write your comments in the forum.