Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Oct 11, 2019 18:33:54 GMT
Anyone know if it's legitimate for my sister in law to certify for me. It doesn't say anything about relatives being unacceptable in the email. I use my bro in law sometimes. (teacher ie: professional person ,dont larf) Just warn her as they might just phone up . Most, but not all relatives are allowed, the primary caveat being the relative must not be financially supported by you.
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Oct 11, 2019 18:34:34 GMT
Anyone know if it's legitimate for my sister in law to certify for me. It doesn't say anything about relatives being unacceptable in the email. Most, but not all relatives are allowed, the primary caveat being the relative must not be financially supported by you.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329 
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Oct 11, 2019 18:54:51 GMT
|
|
sussexlender
Member of DD Central
Cheat seeking missile
Posts: 550
Likes: 916
|
Post by sussexlender on Oct 11, 2019 19:11:50 GMT
RSM are clearly making up the requirements as they go along as this latest stalling device is nonsense. It would only make sense if an investor had changed a bank account during the course of this shambles and was then seeking to have their own investment cash paid to a new bank account. I have received the "we want more info" e mail. The underlying message is "you have failed the Experian test". I have sent an e mail to Lendy support aka RSM demanding to know what information they received about me from Experian. They have no justification for withholding the info they have obtained - if indeed they really have checked anything with Experian. My credit record is 100% and I do not take very kindly to this vastly expensive Administrator refusing to return the funds that have been now been recovered from previously defaulting borrowers. I urge everyone to contact this firm of Administrators to demand to know what information Experian has provided to result in this unwarranted & time wasting exercise of copying, certifying and posting bank statements. They should at the very least be bearing the postage costs themselves - where is the usual pre paid envelope to ensure the correct postage address ? This is clearly part of a vast money making machine at the continued expense of all former Lendy clients. Between us all we have lost many £ Millions and yet we are being treated as if we are all potentially dishonest - and thus forced to spend more on pointless certified documents and postage. PS the answer to a question a few entries back re "what does " noted" mean"? In legal reply speak it means "We have read that and will just ignore it". SXLR No reply from this useless lot of so called credit checking experts - they don't even have sufficient staff to answer a simple question in an e mail. Some may feel this is clearly another delaying tactic designed to milk what is left of investors funds.
|
|
jontyab
Member of DD Central
Posts: 117
Likes: 79
|
Post by jontyab on Oct 11, 2019 19:15:24 GMT
I wonder how many of the 23% who failed the AML verification actually had a credit search done ,I know that apart from 2 insurance quotes my last search was in April,so makes me wonder if RSM just forgot about a lot of these and thought "another nice little earner coming up here gov"  Kuflink was doing an online verification where you either take a live picture with your phone or webcam which I thought at the time was nonsense but compared to this fiasco it turns out to be a good idea I have just checked mine and Lendy did a search on 1/10/19. Strangely, they put my street name in twice as in they repeated the name that came before "street" I have copied and pasted the screen into an email to Lendy and asked them to try again with the correct address. (May not make a difference but it allowed me to vent a little) I had a similarly butchered street address, curiously. I didn't question it at the time as I was fortunate enough to be in the 'verified' section of the dart board.
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Oct 11, 2019 19:16:58 GMT
The above document is general guidance, not as set out in legal statute and precedence. The entire area of legal certification is quite complex, dependant upon document type and who requests the certification, and purpose of certification. My wife has certified many of my documents, and has never been questioned. Lets see if R** have an issue here........If they do, I will report back.
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on Oct 11, 2019 20:16:01 GMT
The above document is general guidance, not as set out in legal statute and precedence. The entire area of legal certification is quite complex, dependant upon document type and who requests the certification, and purpose of certification. My wife has certified many of my documents, and has never been questioned. Lets see if R** have an issue here........If they do, I will report back. Follow 28(2)(b) to get to the relevant text 28(18)(a), but I am not legally trained. Also see 33. Not even sure if this is the relevent legislation. There are probably loads of amendments, too.
Interestingly (well, not really), here is just an example of the amendments needed for Brexit:
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Oct 11, 2019 21:02:17 GMT
The above document is general guidance, not as set out in legal statute and precedence. The entire area of legal certification is quite complex, dependant upon document type and who requests the certification, and purpose of certification. My wife has certified many of my documents, and has never been questioned. Lets see if R** have an issue here........If they do, I will report back. Follow 28(2)(b) to get to the relevant text 28(18)(a), but I am not legally trained. Also see 33. Not even sure if this is the relevent legislation. There are probably loads of amendments, too.
Interestingly (well, not really), here is just an example of the amendments needed for Brexit: Section 28 deals with the ML (Money Laundering Controlled Function - CF 11) officer of the relevant body, namely Lendy, and now RSM. It does not refer in anyway to who can and cannot certify documents. Section 33 mainly deals with PEP (Politically Exposed Persons) and various other high risk categories who require enhanced Due Diligence for certain reasons, together with such people associated with these higher risk individuals. In any case, there is NO excuse for R** to state that several thousand customers have failed identity checks, when many customers were not even checked in the first instance, some of which can prove it, namely myself. At time of writing, there is nothing to suggest that the "failed" lenders [myself included] are anything more than the unlucky ones who were given the short straw by R** to fulfil their audit criteria on ML checks. Yes, I am legally trained many decades ago, and advise on a private basis only to certain individuals. My parting shot for the week, make sure you get your certified docs in early. Enjoy your weekend everyone.
|
|
MarkT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 190
Likes: 159
|
Post by MarkT on Oct 12, 2019 6:28:52 GMT
.............................My parting shot for the week, make sure you get your certified docs in early.
I'm interested to know why you would say that. Surely, any money owed to me remains owed until repaid? Or are there ways that the administrators can appropriate funds if their arbitrary deadline is not met?
If that is the case then it is in their interests to fail as many people as possible which would explain the very high failure rate.
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 1,963
|
Post by rocky1 on Oct 12, 2019 6:53:10 GMT
RSM and shoosmiths will hold on to lenders funds for as long as legally possible.they just do not want to see millions going out of their golden egg and will delay and delay to find ways to claw as much money out of lenders as they can.will lenders who have passed receive their money before end of October.i doubt it very much just a thought do these verified documents have to be in colour or is black and white acceptable
|
|
garfield
Member of DD Central
Posts: 490 
Likes: 268
|
Post by garfield on Oct 12, 2019 7:03:48 GMT
This is making sense to me now. The last time I checked any important legal documents, they were so full of basic typing errors, it was beyond laughable. In fact, it was quite upsetting! Assuming it's a bunch of legal typists who got the onerous task of performing the identity checks, my guess is the apparently random failures are likely to be due to poor "copy and paste" skills.
I think we should demand that all those who "failed" the checks should be re-checked by someone competent.
|
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Oct 12, 2019 9:29:49 GMT
So, I've just received that email. Unfortunately my correspondence address from my bank is different to the Companies House address (which is my accountant's address). How do I sort this nonsense out? Ask your accountant to provide a signed letter on headed paper making that fact clear and include it with the other documents. I emailed them and that's exactly what they requested me to do. Thanks
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on Oct 12, 2019 9:49:20 GMT
In any case, there is NO excuse for R** to state that several thousand customers have failed identity checks, when many customers were not even checked in the first instance, some of which can prove it, namely myself. I have not been trying to justify RSM's actions or statements. My point is that these regulations have been written such that the average citizen has no idea whether they are being treated reasonably or not. Therefore, I think some anger should be saved for the legislators.
|
|
quidco
Member of DD Central
Posts: 295
Likes: 361
|
Post by quidco on Oct 12, 2019 11:25:51 GMT
This is all just going to cost a fortune to resolve; you can see them spending £1000s in order to qualifty someone to return them £50 because it's "their duty"
|
|
elsee
Member of DD Central
Retired:D
Posts: 201
Likes: 117
|
Post by elsee on Oct 12, 2019 13:11:07 GMT
If an external ID validation check comes back as a fail it does not mean the applicant has done anything wrong or has necessarily provided incorrect details.
To pass a Route 2 check the applicant must meet the requirements set-out by Government standards, for a Level 2 (remote) application. This means that they must be matched within the Experian database to the following criteria:
The applicants name and current address to 4 primary data sources and the applicants name and date of birth to 1 data source or;
The applicants name and current address to 3 primary data sources and the applicants name and date of birth to 2 data sources.
If Experian cannot find data to this level or higher the application will return a fail result.
There are several occasions where this may be the case: persons that have just recently arrived in the UK, persons that do not have many credit or finance agreements, persons that have recently moved, or recently changed their name may lack enough matches. For these applicants, alternative identity verification via Route 1 or 3 will be required.
Just found this online. DDC website.
|
|
