1 minute ago, WaveHunter said:

I amended my post to read:  What you are saying makes no sense.  The reason for the changes made in March were expressly to deal with agents depositing funds in client's account, wasn't it?  Why else would they initiate such a bizarre rule?

Heaven knows what was in their minds when a 3 months pre-seasoning requirement didn't stop them, never had! They refused to address the issue at source if that was what they wanted to achieve, and chose instead to inconvenience those actually abiding by the requirements. 

On 4/27/2019 at 12:38 PM, WaveHunter said:

What you are saying makes no sense.  The reason for the changes made in March were expressly to deal with agents depositing funds in client's account, wasn't it?  Why else would they initiate such a bizarre rule?

The 3 mo money-seasoning was not checked for agent-applications before, and is not checked now.  Therefore, changing seasoning, which is not checked for agent-applications, only affects those applying in-person.

 

They make these changes (including going after the embassies / letters) to increase agent-use, by preventing those who qualified under the old-rules from being able to apply w/o an agent under the new rules. 

 

It is the same reason they add "unpublished requirements" at some offices - sending people on wild-goose chases for documents which have nothing to do with their qualification for an extension.  The goal is to wear people down, and get them to give up even trying to play "by the rules."  IOs don't get any "extra money" from in-person, honest folks applying "by the rules," so the bad-ones have noting but contempt for the laws/rules, and those try to follow them.

11 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

The 3 mo money-seasoning was not checked for agent-applications before, and is not checked now.  Therefore, changing seasoning, which is not checked for agent-applications, only affects those applying in-person.

 

They make these changes (including going after the embassies / letters) to increase agent-use, by preventing those who qualified under the old-rules from being able to apply w/o an agent under the new rules. 

 

It is the same reason they add "unpublished requirements" at some offices - sending people on wild-goose chases for documents which have nothing to do with their qualification for an extension.  The goal is to wear people down, and get them to give up even trying to play "by the rules."  IOs don't get any "extra money" from in-person, honest folks applying "by the rules," so the bad-ones have noting but contempt for the laws/rules, and those try to follow them.

Logic tells me that you are probably right, but it's depressing if it is. 

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

The 3 mo money-seasoning was not checked for agent-applications before, and is not checked now.  Therefore, changing seasoning, which is not checked for agent-applications, only affects those applying in-person.

 

They make these changes (including going after the embassies / letters) to increase agent-use, by preventing those who qualified under the old-rules from being able to apply w/o an agent under the new rules. 

 

It is the same reason they add "unpublished requirements" at some offices - sending people on wild-goose chases for documents which have nothing to do with their qualification for an extension.  The goal is to wear people down, and get them to give up even trying to play "by the rules."  IOs don't get any "extra money" from in-person, honest folks applying "by the rules," so the bad-ones have noting but contempt for the laws/rules, and those try to follow them.

If they didn't check them why did agents deposit the money for a day?

17 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

If they didn't check them why did agents deposit the money for a day?

They do want the bank-letter, based on the "1 hour deposit." 

 

It is the "seasoning" that isn't checked for agent-applications.  That's why ...

 

17 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

18 hours ago, JackThompson said:

The 3 mo money-seasoning was not checked for agent-applications before, and is not checked now.  Therefore, changing seasoning, which is not checked for agent-applications, only affects those applying in-person.

 

4 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

They do want the bank-letter, based on the "1 hour deposit." 

 

It is the "seasoning" that isn't checked for agent-applications.  That's why ...

Do you know this as a fact or are you surmising? 

1 minute ago, marcusarelus said:

Do you know this as a fact or are you surmising? 

It's not at all in doubt.  It's been reported for years, and what I was offered personally by several agents.  All I needed was a bank-account in my name for them to use to put the money in/out (and they are reported to help opening bank-accts, if needed).

Just now, JackThompson said:

It's not at all in doubt.  It's been reported for years, and what I was offered personally by several agents.  All I needed was a bank-account in my name for them to use to put the money in/out (and they are reported to help opening bank-accts, if needed).

I mean now.  Within the past 3 months and the recent changes.  Cause that's not what I hear.  It has changed.  Is your information current or are you surmising?