4 ms·
Seizing money out of a customer's bank account is really quite reprehensible. It's quite easy to imagine a situation in which someone has a savings account for
by kintamanimatt 13y ago
Seizing money out of a customer's bank account is really quite reprehensible. It's quite easy to imagine a situation in which someone has a savings account for a specific purpose that they have the discipline to not touch (e.g. an "oh shit" fund), and then suddenly find that money has been stolen one morning by the government. Indeed, I've had a number of savings accounts that have been for specific purposes that have neither grown nor shrunk, untouched for years because there has been no necessity.
The only situation I can think of in which it's somewhat ok for the government to raid a citizen's bank account is if the customer has been uncontactable for a number of years and cannot be found after a diligent search. Bar this, it's just theft.
- Maxious 13y ago> The only situation I can think of in which it's somewhat ok for the government to raid a citizen's bank account is if the customer has been uncontactable for a number of years and cannot be found after a diligent search. "ASIC's Unclaimed Monies Unit regularly sends letters to people and companies whose names match our records." There are also private companies (Dun and Bradstreet etc.) who scrape the records and try to contact owners for a finders fee.
- kintamanimatt 13y agoOh, well, that's a bit better. The article would have the reader believe that it's an automatic government seizure program and that the bank account holder only gets to find out their funds have been stolen when the money is already gone.
- brc 13y agoI had money seized under this change. I did not receive a letter from ASIC. All I got was an email, which I skim-read and filed as being ok. There was two months from announcement to seizure. It is NOT ok.