AF62 wrote:UncleEbenezer wrote:I doubt it's AML.
Don't agree - From everything 4lex has said, it has all the hallmarks of triggering AML.
Yes, my immediate thought was that it was probably an AML trigger that first set this scenario into motion. Either that, or else TSB suspected that the OP might be trying to do something illicit to a more or less dormant account where the assets beneficially belonged to his co-signatory.
Total devil's advocate here
, but the bank might have wondered whether his sister was aware at all of the transaction, or indeed whether she was in a fit state to manage the account herself? (Vulnerability issues, you get my drift?) What with all the "Nigerian scams" and so forth, it would have seemed logical - and indeed sensible! - for the bank to demand extra certainty and security before allowing a cross-border access of the account to take place.
But the puzzle is that, if so, they could have just asked her!
BJ