Hmmm.
We had the problem almost 10 years ago when we bought a house in the UK whilst on an overseas posting, coinciding with two significant Acts – principally the Serious and Organised Crimes Act 2003 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2003. Both Acts require financial institutions to exercise ‘due diligence’ to ensure that people are who they say they are and that money isn’t being Laundered.
The Mortgage lender (like the local authority) ‘demanded’ that we presented our passports in person, in the UK, before they would proceed. I pointed out that we had already banked with them for eight years and that this should have been sufficient to establish our bone fides. They didn’t see the trap that I had sprung. If they still rejected our application, they themselves were in breach of the new regulations by not ensuring that existing account holders were who they say they were. Added to that appalling customer service, with agents quoting completely ‘made up’ regulations (I then sought the transcriptions of the calls) and I got the mortgage, got an apology and an ex gratia payment for catching them out telling fibs.
On the issue of how deep they dig, if you provide information that they find was subsequently incorrect in an effort to circumvent frankly bonkers legislation, it will open up a world of hurt. In the matter of primary school admission in the first case, Local Authorities are under real pressure to cut expenditure and to be answerable to central Government edicts on a plethora of restrictions, especially to do with benefits and social expenditure at large. The result is that rules are delivered with bluntness and pursued with near missionary zeal (vide rubbish collection and school zoning surveillance operations). Anyway, why should we have to lie when we’ve done nothing wrong?
Last edited by Whenurhappy; 7th Jun 2013 at 12:03.