Our investigation

The bank was entitled to place restrictions on Ervin’s accounts while it investigated concerns about his use of the accounts. However, the bank failed to communicate clearly and effectively with Ervin. Specifically, it did not tell him why it had frozen the accounts or what steps he would need to take before it would consider unfreezing them.

There were lengthy periods during which the bank gave Ervin little or no information, despite his repeated requests for updates and despite the bank’s assurances that someone would contact him. The bank’s records showed that it was not until two months after the freeze that the bank gave him any substantive information about the restrictions and explained the nature of its concerns about funds deposited into his accounts.

Outcome

Ervin withdrew his complaint pending the outcome of court proceedings relating to funds deposited into his account.