I am 83 and recently tried to open a new savings account.
The bank said I couldn’t as I don’t have either a passport or photo driving licence, nor access to a smartphone.
It said these were required to verify my identity. Is the bank allowed to discriminate against me in this way?
B.F., address supplied.
Dean Dunham replies: A bank is allowed to verify your identity, but it must do so fairly and reasonably.
It cannot simply shut the door because you do not have a passport, photo driving licence or a smartphone.
Frozen out: An 83-year-old reader is struggling to open a new savings account without a smartphone
Banks are required by law to carry out identity checks under anti-money laundering rules.
However, these orders do not say only digital or photo ID must be used, nor that customers need a smartphone.
What is required is that banks have procedures that are inclusive and accessible, particularly for older customers and those who are digitally excluded. Regulators have been very clear on this point.
Refusing to offer an alternative way to prove who you are could amount to age discrimination, which is unlawful under the Equality Act 2010, unless the bank can show its approach is justified. Just saying ‘this is our system’ is not good enough.
Most banks accept other identification, such as an older-style driving licence, a birth certificate, a pension or benefits letter, or council tax or utility bills.
Another option is for you to undergo in-branch verification by a member of staff.
Crucially, banks should offer non-digital routes for customers who cannot or do not wish to use smartphones or apps.
My advice is to go back to the bank and make a formal complaint, stating that you are being unfairly excluded and asking what alternative ID options are available.
If the bank refuses or drags its heels, you can escalate it to the Financial Ombudsman Service, which has helped consumers in similar situations. Being 83 should not mean being locked out of banking.
Neighbour’s home gives me the sinking feeling
I am selling my home following a divorce. I know my neighbour’s house has subsidence, and the work he has done to ‘fix’ it looks like a botched job to me.
Our homes are separated only by a 12ft driveway so I’m worried it could cause issues for my property in the future.
The estate agent says it’s not on my land so I don’t have to tell any potential buyers but I’m worried this could come back to bite me. What am I obliged to say?
D.R, Lincolnshire.
Dean Dunham replies: The starting point here is that when you sell a home in England and Wales, you have to complete a Property Information Form (TA6). This is a legally important document and buyers are entitled to rely on the answers you give.
You are not generally obliged to volunteer information about neighbouring sites unless it affects your property. However, subsidence is an issue in the danger zone.
If you have a genuine concern the subsidence could impact your home’s structural integrity, value or insurability, that may be considered a material fact that would be disclosable to a buyer.
If you are asked whether your home has ever been affected by subsidence, heave or structural movement, only answer ‘no’ if that’s the case. But if you know of a nearby problem that could reasonably give rise to future issues and you deliberately withhold that information, you run the risk of a buyer later alleging misrepresentation.
That’s where the estate agent’s advice is too simplistic. ‘It’s not on your land’ is not the legal test. The real question is if a reasonable buyer would consider the information relevant when deciding whether to proceed or how much to pay.
My advice is to not speculate or diagnose. Stick to the facts. If asked, you can say you are aware of remedial works at the neighbouring property, but your home has not experienced subsidence and you have no expert evidence of any impact.
If you are genuinely worried, consider commissioning a structural engineer’s report. It may cost a few hundred pounds, but it could save you years of stress and a potential legal claim later on.
When answering buyers’ questions about a property, carefully framed and fact-based responses are always the safest route.
