Providing ID & bank statement to estate agent when buying property

[royw]

Thank you for your replies. I have avoided the need to make an immediate decision as I have contacted the seller's solicitor directly so the process is going ahead (EA was refusing to issue memorandum of sale).
I do not wish to get the EA into trouble by refusing the info requested but am not convinced it's a legal obligation.
The phrase "put in place procedures to identify customers and verify the customer’s identity before entering into a business relationship or transaction". I am not a customer of the EA in this instance. My ID must be verified before I can register the property I'm buying anyway. As I see it the EA is putting buyers in touch with sellers & nothing more. The actual transaction is nothing to do with them. Actually I am a customer of EA as they find tenants for another btl & for which they have not asked either for ID or proof of ownership of property.
I will ask the vendor if they have asked for her ID - bet they haven't!
I strongly suspect the proof of funds issue is the EA covering their backs in case I don't have the money. My word is my bond & if the seller doesn't believe me (she does) I'll buy another property instead.
Mars mug - very useful info, thank you. I think it hinges on being a customer of the EA. I don't think I am (no contract, no money changing hands) so would be interested in your explanation as to why it applies.
As it stands I will not be providing a bank statement (will lose interest if just leaving purchase price in) but may provide ID.

[Mars Mug]

I do not wish to get the EA into trouble by refusing the info requested but am not convinced it's a legal obligation.

They are legally obliged to request identification, you may not be legally obliged to provide it, but if you don’t and the EA is suspicious then they should report the matter to SOCA, they may or may not do this. I don’t know how they will view the situation, but I suspect that there’s nothing lost for them if they do report it.

Mars mug - very useful info, thank you. I think it hinges on being a customer of the EA. I don't think I am (no contract, no money changing hands) so would be interested in your explanation as to why it applies.

I think all the answers are in the links provided, some of those .pdf files are not a big effort to read through. If an estate agent is involved in the transaction, then they have clear obligations to verify the legitimacy of the transaction and to inform SOCA if they have suspicions of wrongdoing. I don’t believe that you have to be their direct customer / client.

"Customer due diligence

10.7 Chapter 6 sets out businesses’ obligations to identify and verify a customer's identity before entering into a business relationship or transaction. For estate agents, the obligation under the regulations is to identify clients. This will usually be sellers (vendors).

10.8 Whilst estate agents are required to only undertake customer due diligence measures for sellers when acting as their agents, best practice would be to identify the purchaser in addition to the seller once an offer has been accepted."

[jjlandlord]

"suspicious", "best practice", etc. fair enough, but where is the legal obligation to require ID of potential buyers? Is it by default suspicious to be a cash buyer?

Royw:
as previously said, this is not very important. Focus on showing that you are a serious cash buyer without showing your hand.

[Mars Mug]

"suspicious", "best practice", etc. fair enough, but where is the legal obligation to require ID of potential buyers? Is it by default suspicious to be a cash buyer?

No, cash buyers are not by default suspicious, the cash buyers who refuse to provide requested ID may well be.

Royw is welcome to follow your advice, he’s not a money launderer, the worst thing that might happen is he could be investigated and quite probably completely without his knowledge, and he will hear nothing of it.

As cash buyers myself and my partner had to provide ID, passports and other documents, to my bank and to my solicitors. In our case there was no estate agent involved. Both the bank and the solicitors explained that the purpose was in relation to money laundering regulations.

[royw]

As cash buyers myself and my partner had to provide ID, passports and other documents, to my bank and to my solicitors.

That's my point. I am happy to provide ID to the solicitor who registers the property transfer as they have a legal obligation to check it. My bank is entitled to check it is me who is transferring the money. If they are going to investigate everyone who declines to give personal information to anyone with such a tenuous connection they will be very busy!

Seems to me Money Laundering is the financial equivalent of Elf 'n Sefty and we are not supposed to question it.

[jjlandlord]

Solicitors will always ask for ID, whether cash buyer or not, indeed because of money laundering prevention purposes as you are their client and they will have to handle large amount of money of your behalf, and because they will handle land registry, stamp duty, etc. forms.

No, cash buyers are not by default suspicious, the cash buyers who refuse to provide requested ID may well be.

They should request ID in case of suspicious transactions, not ask for ID in all cases and tell you that you are now suspicious when voicing concerns.
I've lived in authoritarian countries and they would appreciate the tactic

Royw is welcome to follow your advice

You did not understand my advice to him:
If he's a serious buyer he should not spend too much time on the ID issue, and just show one to them. They key for him, imo, is to show that he's got the funds ready without showing his hand. Ie. that he's got the funds to match his offer, not more, and nothing else.

Seems to me Money Laundering is the financial equivalent of Elf 'n Sefty and we are not supposed to question it.

If you question it the terrorists win.

[Mars Mug]

Solicitors will always ask for ID, whether cash buyer or not…

I know; I was just making the point that at one or more stages in the transaction ID will be required. If royw had objected to providing ID on principle then this would become a problem again later, it wasn’t until post #15 that royw made it clear that wasn’t the case.

They should request ID in case of suspicious transactions…

I think it’s perhaps just the Estate Agent going through a formality a little too early in the process, and may also be combined with what you suggested about avoiding time-wasters.

You did not understand my advice to him:

I did understand, and didn’t disagree, there would be no risk to royw other than possibly delaying the process (but not in this case since he’s bypassed the EA anyway).

But going back to post #1 which questioned why the EA was requesting ID and if it was a legal requirement, then I still think the answer is the requirements on EAs to follow Money Laundering regulations.