Andy Burnham: Stop HSBC Bank UK Abuse (Sign for Marian's Law, to STOP HSBC Bank UK abuse)
The Issue
Sign for Marian's Law, to STOP HSBC Bank UK abuse.
UK Parliament: Stop HSBC Bank Holding Citizens’ Money Indefinitely Without Valid Reasons
HSBC Bank UK - Half Year Profits = £14.5 billion, while iligally holding my money since 4th of February 2025. Almost 21 months (One year and nine months) Source of profits: https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/hsbc-profits-windfall-tax-burnham-37510512
UK Parliament Must Act first on HSBC Bank UK.
No Bank Should Be Allowed to Leave a Citizen Without Their Existential Money
A Petition for Urgent Legislative Reform of UK Banking Law to Protect Individual Customers
To the UK Parliament and Treasury Select Committee
We call on the UK Parliament to introduce urgent legislation that protects individual citizens and legal residents from having their personal funds withheld by banks for prolonged periods without clear justification, adequate communication, or emergency access to essential money.
Banks in the United Kingdom currently hold significant legal powers to restrict and withhold customer funds under anti-money laundering and regulatory compliance frameworks. These powers were designed to combat serious financial crime. They were not designed to leave ordinary people — workers, savers, residents — without money for food, rent, and basic living costs for months or years, with no explanation and no remedy.
This petition is brought following the case of a European immigrant with Indefinite Leave to Remain in the United Kingdom, who deposited a certified cheque of £10,300 issued by Lloyds Bank — a regulated UK institution — into his HSBC account on 4 February 2025. HSBC blocked his account immediately after the deposit. No adequate explanation was given. His funds of £10,994 were withheld for over 1 year and 8 months. He lost his home. He lost his ability to work in the UK. He accumulated debt. His credit rating was destroyed. His health deteriorated. He was forced to leave the country.
HSBC told him, repeatedly, that they were acting under "legal and regulatory obligations." They were never required to explain what those obligations were, why they lasted so long, or what would end them. The Financial Ombudsman Service, funded by the banks it regulates, found in HSBC's favour — accepting confidential evidence from HSBC that was never disclosed to the customer.
This is not justice. This is a gap in the law that leaves individual citizens defenceless against institutional power.
What the Law Currently Allows
Under current UK legislation — including the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, the Money Laundering Regulations 2017, and associated frameworks — banks may restrict customer accounts and withhold funds for regulatory compliance purposes. There is no statutory maximum time limit on how long funds may be withheld from an individual customer. There is no requirement to provide the customer with the reason for the restriction. There is no emergency access provision for essential living costs. And the Financial Ombudsman Service, which is meant to adjudicate disputes, may accept evidence from banks that it does not share with the complainant.
These provisions may be appropriate when applied to businesses, corporations, or individuals under active criminal investigation. They are not appropriate when applied to ordinary citizens and legal residents whose only crime is depositing their own legitimately earned savings into a bank account.
What We Are Asking Parliament to Change
1. Maximum withholding period for individual customers: Parliament should introduce a statutory maximum time limit — no longer than 30 days — within which a bank must either release funds held in an individual customer's account or obtain a court order to continue the restriction. No bank should be able to withhold a citizen's personal funds indefinitely under a regulatory justification that is never explained and never reviewed.
2. Emergency access to essential funds: When a bank restricts an individual customer's account, legislation must require the bank to provide immediate access to a minimum sum sufficient to cover essential living costs — food, rent, utilities, and basic transport — for the duration of the restriction. A person's savings are their survival. No regulatory process justifies leaving someone without the means to live.
3. Mandatory written explanation: When a bank restricts an individual customer's account, it must provide a written explanation within 72 hours stating the specific regulatory ground for the restriction and an estimated timeframe for resolution. Vague references to "legal and regulatory obligations" are not sufficient.
4. Independent Financial Ombudsman funding: The Financial Ombudsman Service must be funded independently of the banks it regulates. Its investigators must not accept evidence from one party that is withheld from the other. Both parties to a complaint must have access to all material relied upon in reaching a decision.
5. Prohibition on account closure as retaliation: It must be made explicitly unlawful for a bank to close a customer's account, or to withhold a closing balance, as a direct or indirect consequence of that customer raising a formal complaint. This practice constitutes victimisation and must carry civil and regulatory consequences.
6. Equal treatment regardless of nationality: Banks must not apply stricter or more prolonged account restrictions to customers on the basis of their nationality or national origin. EU nationals and other legal residents with settled or pre-settled status hold the same rights as British citizens in respect of their personal finances and must be treated accordingly.
Why This Matters to Everyone
We are encouraged by Government and by the banks themselves to keep our money in bank accounts. We trust the banking system with our savings, our wages, our security. That trust must be protected by law.
The powers that banks hold over individual customers are not balanced by adequate legal protections for those customers. A business can hire lawyers to challenge a bank's decision within hours. An individual citizen — particularly one whose funds are being withheld — has no such recourse. The Financial Ombudsman process takes months. The courts take years. In the meantime, the bank holds the money and faces no consequence.
This imbalance is not acceptable in a fair and democratic society. The UK Parliament has the power to correct it.
Sign This Petition
We call on the UK Parliament to introduce legislation that sets clear limits on how long banks may withhold individual customers' funds, guarantees emergency access to essential money during any restriction, requires transparent written justification, and prohibits account closure as retaliation for complaints.
If you believe that citizens and legal residents of the United Kingdom deserve protection from being left without their own money — with no explanation and no remedy — please sign and share this petition.
Marian Marin
European immigrant, Indefinite Leave to Remain, UK resident since 2016
October 2026
16
The Issue
Sign for Marian's Law, to STOP HSBC Bank UK abuse.
UK Parliament: Stop HSBC Bank Holding Citizens’ Money Indefinitely Without Valid Reasons
HSBC Bank UK - Half Year Profits = £14.5 billion, while iligally holding my money since 4th of February 2025. Almost 21 months (One year and nine months) Source of profits: https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/hsbc-profits-windfall-tax-burnham-37510512
UK Parliament Must Act first on HSBC Bank UK.
No Bank Should Be Allowed to Leave a Citizen Without Their Existential Money
A Petition for Urgent Legislative Reform of UK Banking Law to Protect Individual Customers
To the UK Parliament and Treasury Select Committee
We call on the UK Parliament to introduce urgent legislation that protects individual citizens and legal residents from having their personal funds withheld by banks for prolonged periods without clear justification, adequate communication, or emergency access to essential money.
Banks in the United Kingdom currently hold significant legal powers to restrict and withhold customer funds under anti-money laundering and regulatory compliance frameworks. These powers were designed to combat serious financial crime. They were not designed to leave ordinary people — workers, savers, residents — without money for food, rent, and basic living costs for months or years, with no explanation and no remedy.
This petition is brought following the case of a European immigrant with Indefinite Leave to Remain in the United Kingdom, who deposited a certified cheque of £10,300 issued by Lloyds Bank — a regulated UK institution — into his HSBC account on 4 February 2025. HSBC blocked his account immediately after the deposit. No adequate explanation was given. His funds of £10,994 were withheld for over 1 year and 8 months. He lost his home. He lost his ability to work in the UK. He accumulated debt. His credit rating was destroyed. His health deteriorated. He was forced to leave the country.
HSBC told him, repeatedly, that they were acting under "legal and regulatory obligations." They were never required to explain what those obligations were, why they lasted so long, or what would end them. The Financial Ombudsman Service, funded by the banks it regulates, found in HSBC's favour — accepting confidential evidence from HSBC that was never disclosed to the customer.
This is not justice. This is a gap in the law that leaves individual citizens defenceless against institutional power.
What the Law Currently Allows
Under current UK legislation — including the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, the Money Laundering Regulations 2017, and associated frameworks — banks may restrict customer accounts and withhold funds for regulatory compliance purposes. There is no statutory maximum time limit on how long funds may be withheld from an individual customer. There is no requirement to provide the customer with the reason for the restriction. There is no emergency access provision for essential living costs. And the Financial Ombudsman Service, which is meant to adjudicate disputes, may accept evidence from banks that it does not share with the complainant.
These provisions may be appropriate when applied to businesses, corporations, or individuals under active criminal investigation. They are not appropriate when applied to ordinary citizens and legal residents whose only crime is depositing their own legitimately earned savings into a bank account.
What We Are Asking Parliament to Change
1. Maximum withholding period for individual customers: Parliament should introduce a statutory maximum time limit — no longer than 30 days — within which a bank must either release funds held in an individual customer's account or obtain a court order to continue the restriction. No bank should be able to withhold a citizen's personal funds indefinitely under a regulatory justification that is never explained and never reviewed.
2. Emergency access to essential funds: When a bank restricts an individual customer's account, legislation must require the bank to provide immediate access to a minimum sum sufficient to cover essential living costs — food, rent, utilities, and basic transport — for the duration of the restriction. A person's savings are their survival. No regulatory process justifies leaving someone without the means to live.
3. Mandatory written explanation: When a bank restricts an individual customer's account, it must provide a written explanation within 72 hours stating the specific regulatory ground for the restriction and an estimated timeframe for resolution. Vague references to "legal and regulatory obligations" are not sufficient.
4. Independent Financial Ombudsman funding: The Financial Ombudsman Service must be funded independently of the banks it regulates. Its investigators must not accept evidence from one party that is withheld from the other. Both parties to a complaint must have access to all material relied upon in reaching a decision.
5. Prohibition on account closure as retaliation: It must be made explicitly unlawful for a bank to close a customer's account, or to withhold a closing balance, as a direct or indirect consequence of that customer raising a formal complaint. This practice constitutes victimisation and must carry civil and regulatory consequences.
6. Equal treatment regardless of nationality: Banks must not apply stricter or more prolonged account restrictions to customers on the basis of their nationality or national origin. EU nationals and other legal residents with settled or pre-settled status hold the same rights as British citizens in respect of their personal finances and must be treated accordingly.
Why This Matters to Everyone
We are encouraged by Government and by the banks themselves to keep our money in bank accounts. We trust the banking system with our savings, our wages, our security. That trust must be protected by law.
The powers that banks hold over individual customers are not balanced by adequate legal protections for those customers. A business can hire lawyers to challenge a bank's decision within hours. An individual citizen — particularly one whose funds are being withheld — has no such recourse. The Financial Ombudsman process takes months. The courts take years. In the meantime, the bank holds the money and faces no consequence.
This imbalance is not acceptable in a fair and democratic society. The UK Parliament has the power to correct it.
Sign This Petition
We call on the UK Parliament to introduce legislation that sets clear limits on how long banks may withhold individual customers' funds, guarantees emergency access to essential money during any restriction, requires transparent written justification, and prohibits account closure as retaliation for complaints.
If you believe that citizens and legal residents of the United Kingdom deserve protection from being left without their own money — with no explanation and no remedy — please sign and share this petition.
Marian Marin
European immigrant, Indefinite Leave to Remain, UK resident since 2016
October 2026
Petition Updates
Share this petition
Petition created on 9 October 2026