Late payment excuse

[oversteer]

Do any banks routinely hold payments to new payees due to "money laundering" regs?

I have been told that my first week's payment has been held back for this reason, following a successful transfer of £500 the account will be 'unlocked' and I will receive payments for the full amount.

Anyone heard this before?

[NeverBeenNorthOfTheM25]

Do any banks routinely hold payments to new payees due to "money laundering" regs?

I have been told that my first week's payment has been held back for this reason, following a successful transfer of £500 the account will be 'unlocked' and I will receive payments for the full amount.

Anyone heard this before?

Ive never heard of this, out of curiosity, who's the bank?? Also not being funny but I would have thought £500 is fairly low on the money laundering area ......

[NickFitz]

Do any banks routinely hold payments to new payees due to "money laundering" regs?

I have been told that my first week's payment has been held back for this reason, following a successful transfer of £500 the account will be 'unlocked' and I will receive payments for the full amount.

Anyone heard this before?

Was this by any chance explained to you in an email from [email protected] purporting to be from a bank that you don't even have an account with?

If so, you might want to hold off on that Western Union money transfer...

[oversteer]

Certainly seems like this is "cheque is in the post" for the BACS/Faster Payments era.

Mind you, this is an agency now with three weeks of my money.. despite guarantees that "£xx,000 of other payments went out just fine on the same day"...

[RichardCranium]

Oh dear.

Is it the agency that has told you there is a problem, or the bank? If the former, start getting very worried.

[oversteer]

Yes, it's the agency.. gulp

[Gonzo]

Do any banks routinely hold payments to new payees due to "money laundering" regs?

I have been told that my first week's payment has been held back for this reason, following a successful transfer of £500 the account will be 'unlocked' and I will receive payments for the full amount.

Anyone heard this before?

Never heard of that but you don't make it clear which bank is supposedly holding up the payment - the payer's bank or your own bank (payee).

The banks are obliged to conduct money laundering checks on their own customers before they can allow that customer's account to be operational but to whom the customers make payments is not really any of their business.

Besides, I fail to see what a successful transfer of £500 would prove for money laundering purposes so I think you are being told porkies.

[BolshieBastard]

Do any banks routinely hold payments to new payees due to "money laundering" regs?

I have been told that my first week's payment has been held back for this reason, following a successful transfer of £500 the account will be 'unlocked' and I will receive payments for the full amount.

Anyone heard this before?

Erm, the cheque's in the post in other words!

What a load of bollocks. The agency is holding your money back!

[oversteer]

Yeah, I'm certainly in agreement. The agency has blamed their bank for the delay.

The first week's payment is now overdue by a week, which I believe breaches the 14 day payment term in the contract.

At some point, do I consider invoicing ClientCo directly?

[NickFitz]

Yeah, I'm certainly in agreement. The agency has blamed their bank for the delay.

The first week's payment is now overdue by a week, which I believe breaches the 14 day payment term in the contract.

At some point, do I consider invoicing ClientCo directly?

I don't see how you can, as you don't have a contract with them

Tell the agency that as they are now in breach of contract you intend to institute legal proceedings - this will make it clear that you will accept no backsliding on this matter. If they are in "a little temporary difficulty", they'll pay troublemakers first to avoid getting a black mark on their credit rating. Also tell them that unless payment is received you will have no option but to withdraw your services from the client, and will of course have to explain to the client why you are doing so.

If that doesn't work, go ahead and tell the client that it won't be possible for you to provide your services through that agency any more, as they are in financial difficulties, but that you would be willing to work for them under a new contract, either direct (if the agency is in breach then the handcuff clause is void) or through an alternative agency.

The end client probably won't want to continue dealings with a failing agency, particularly if they have more than one contractor working through it, so the agency will probably cough up to avoid you saying anything to the client. If they can't cough up, at least you know where you stand, and the client will hopefully be grateful to you for giving them the inside track on the situation before they send good money after bad.

If it becomes necessary to get another agency involved to re-contract, the client may be able to put the squeeze on the new agency's margin so as to ensure that you ultimately don't lose out over the duration of the contract even if the first agency goes bust owing you money. That way it doesn't end up costing either you or the client anything, and the second agency will just have to bite the bullet over the low margin on your contract in the hope of getting the ongoing business that would previously have been given to the first agency.

Of course I've just got back from the pub, so all this could be absolute rubbish of the most unworkable kind

EDIT: Ooh, my 5005 post - I'll have a to go with that palindromic number