It is a few years since Spencer bought his current vehicle, but the hindrances the bank put in the way of Spencer spending his own money as he sees fit are worth recounting even at this later date.
Spencer had gone to a reputable dealer in second-hand motor vehicles and had agreed to purchase a Peugeot for about £7500. The car had been thoroughly examined by Spencer, who is no slouch at mechanicking, the paperwork all inspected and deemed in order, the guarantee put in place, and all that remained to do was to transfer the funds which lay in the bank in more than sufficient quantity. Online banking was engaged through his mobile phone, and the process begun.
The bank however deemed it necessary that Spencer must telephone a bank employee, a lady based somewhere very far from the yard wherein the motor vehicle sat. This was no simple matter due to hindrances in communication, not least that the bank system repeatedly refused to accept that Spencer was Spencer. When at last connected, the lady at the bank refused to allow the payment to be made until she had asked Spencer a great many questions about the dealer and the vehicle: Did the seller appear trustworthy? Was it an established dealership ? Did the car have a current MoT certificate ? What kind of condition was it in? Were the tyres legal ? Was Spencer satisfied with the condition of the bodywork? Had Spencer taken it for a test drive ? Was it in a fit state to be on the road ?
After a lengthy conversation, the lady at the bank was eventually persuaded that she liked the car enough to allow Spencer to spend his own money on it, and approved the transfer.
On the one hand, it is good that the bank seeks to frustrate the old rule that ‘a fool and his money are soon parted’. On the other hand, Spencer’s money is not the property of the bank, and the bank should have no right to prevent him spending as much of it as he chooses, on whatever he chooses, at the time of his choosing.
Spencer notes that the bank does not reciprocate the obligation it puts on him. The bank provides him with no information whatsoever about what it does with his money while it is in the bank’s custody. Nor as far as he knows does Spencer have any right to demand that the bank seeks particular permissions before doing what it does with his money. The relationship is not balanced. The bank may do what it likes with Spencer’s money, but Spencer may not do as he likes with his own money.