Cash deposits and money laundering in the UK
<p>In the United Kingdom (UK), the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Conduct_Authority" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Financial Conduct Authority</a> (FCA) requires that banks have &quot;adequate policies and procedures sufficient to counter  the risk that they might be used to further financial crime&quot;.</p>
<p>There is no specific limit on cash receipts imposed by the FCA, and the attitude of the banks will depend on their prior knowledge of you. The algorithms that identify retail depositor behaviour may trigger the banks' anti-money-laundering (AML) mechanisms to inquire further, should there be a concern of an abnormal activity in depositing.</p>
<p><strong>Consider the following scenario:</strong> An individual who routinely pays in steady and low income into the account (suppose 1000 GBP per month), decides to sell their belongings for cash and deposits e.g. 25,000 GBP. This is flagged by their bank as suspicious activity.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Can this be classified as <strong>unexplained wealth</strong> if the depositor is unable to prove the origin of funds?</p>
</li>
<li><p>If this cannot fall under the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexplained_wealth_order" rel="nofollow noreferrer">unexplained wealth order</a> (UWO)  <sup>[see description below]</sup>, then can the funds be confiscated?</p>
</li>
<li><p>If the individual's cash deposit is refused by the bank, what role does the FCA play in this process? Is the individual able to take their cash and attempt to deposit it at another bank?</p>
</li>
</ol>
<hr />
<p>Quote by the UK Home Office:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A UWO requires a person who is reasonably suspected of involvement in,
or of being connected to a person involved in, serious crime to
explain the nature and extent of their interest in particular
property, and to explain how the property was obtained, where there
are reasonable grounds to suspect that the respondent’s known lawfully
obtained income would be insufficient to allow the respondent to
obtain the property. The test for involvement with serious crime is by
reference to Part 1 of the Serious Crime Act 2007.</p>
<p>A UWO can also be applied to politicians or officials from outside the
European Economic Area (EEA), or those associated with them i.e.
Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs). A UWO made in relation to a
non-EEA PEP would not require suspicion of serious criminality.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>PS. I would be keen to hear about similar practices in the US and EU.</p>

<p>In what way is this person "reasonably suspected of involvement in, or of being connected to a person involved in, serious crime": having cash is not enough to create a reasonable suspicion of this. So, no.</p>

united-kingdom regulations money-laundering