Of late there was a seminar convened by the UK on the issue of law & justice which invited our 77 judges. But if it is a situation involving an Indian,everybody talks as if everybody over there was the PM. Practically what they do should be evident from the following narrative based on personal experience of mine in connection with some remittance from a bank.
A bank manager of the UK after making me spend all the money in the name of govt formalities and finally accepting Bank service charges in connection with some remittance, rushed to the revenue board to feed that a bloody black Indian, not knowing english, is taking away so much money from their country. Why didn't he deny doing it to the payer party straightway? Because they won't agree and may go to some other bank. The bank had to earn something also. The manager was referring me while my 68 years old mother was their prospective beneficiary/client, not me. Going by common sense he could have even asked the govt authority involved not to give approval for remittance. There comes the alibi that it came to his knowledge the next day of taking bank service charges that I/client was not a good man!
Under such an insinuation he got issued a notice to me by the same that money transfer( wire) had been intercepted on the way. This is normally a phony claim as there is no such technology on the earth nor there could be. Then they started to demand NRT which was not applicable for the sum involved. Then when NRT paying was finished then they(revenue board) started to demand the penalty which I refused to pay. As per UK's banking law It is not Bank's headache to ensure that all govt/taxation formalities stands finished before it transferes money! It is regularly checked on the way by the Revenue board !!!!
But in any case NRT is not applicable for the involved amount even today. An approval letter as issued by Financial Service Authority is lying with me which explicitly Authorizes the client to withdraw the money from the temporary account of the bank in any possible mode as per client's discretion. The attorney who did all this is still standing by me but agrees to only depose in the court but can't file any suit.
There is a fundamental principle of banking that money does not belong to a country. Money belongs to the account holder in whichever part of the world the same might be living or migrating. But in relation to Asian or Indian it has to be reminded. Moreover even more fundamental is the principle of settlement of credit/debit at the end of transaction.