A deposit somebody else made creates a rail that can never pay you

A third-party payment is the mirror image of a dead rail. The rail works, the destination is real, the money arrived - and the payment still cannot come back, because the name on it does not match the name on the account. The cap is frozen rather than unreachable.

Rail stub

The payment: from another name
The rail: working, and blocked by the name rule
What freezes: that rail’s cap
On the sample: 9 working days, 3 documents

the railA payment method that has carried a completed deposit - not a method saved on the account

the capWhat a rail paid in, less what it has already returned, and never below zero

released moneyThe part of a balance above every cap: payable, and travelling by the operator’s own route

Direct answerA deposit from somebody else’s card, bank account or wallet creates a rail the operator cannot pay back, because the destination would not carry the account holder’s name. The cap behind that deposit is frozen while evidence of the relationship is checked - and the rest of the balance is unaffected.

How the deposit gets in at all

Deposits are not routinely name-checked at the time. An operator wants a deposit to complete in seconds, and a synchronous name check would slow every payment to protect against a case that is rare. So the payment is accepted, the balance rises, play happens - and the problem surfaces later, at the only moment the loop applies the name rule, which is the withdrawal.

S5, worked: what a 150.00 third-party deposit freezesthe deposit 150.00, card in another name accepted at the time yes - deposits are not name-checked at the rail its cap 150.00 the check the destination must carry the account holder’s name the payer name does not match outcome the 150.00 cannot return to that rail if it is the whole account balance 150.00 frozen 150.00 = 100.0% inside a 440.00 account cap total 440.00 frozen 150.00 = 34.1% free to travel 440.00 - 150.00 = 290.00 the sample asks for 3 documents over 9 working days

That 34.1% is the number that matters. A third-party deposit does not stop a withdrawal; it removes one rail’s worth of capacity from the account and leaves the rest working. A reader whose other deposits total 290.00 can withdraw up to that figure without any of it being caught by the freeze - which is the practical advice on this page, and it is worth more than any argument about the rule.

What the review is actually deciding

Two different questions are being answered at once, and separating them explains why the process feels roundabout.

Whose money is it

The first question is whether the reader is playing with their own funds. Evidence of the payer’s identity and of the relationship answers it, and this is the part that takes the documents.

Is the account being run for somebody else

The second question is whether the account is a front. A pattern of deposits from several unrelated names, or from a name with no plausible connection, is treated differently from a single payment by a partner or a parent - and the first pattern is not something documents resolve.

The desk takes no position on which deposits an operator should accept. What it can say is structural: because the name rule is applied at the exit rather than at the entrance, a reader cannot know at the time whether a deposit has created a working rail. The payment history’s payer names are the only place that information exists, and it is worth reading once before relying on a rail.

The timeline can be run in parallel with the rest of the account. A hold on 150.00 does not hold the 290.00. A reader can ask for the unfrozen part to be paid while the review runs, and doing so in the same ticket - one thread, one record - is usually faster than waiting for the review to finish before asking for anything.

Keeping it from happening again

Pay in only from rails in the account holder’s own name, including any card used on somebody else’s behalf.
Read the payer names in the payment history once, now, rather than at the moment a withdrawal stops. It is a short list.
If a third-party payment is unavoidable, treat that rail as spent and do not plan a withdrawal on it.
Expect a document request if a deposit was made for you. The sample asks for three, and none of them is about the reader’s own identity.
Keep the frozen amount separate in your own head from the balance. One is a number in a table; the other is the number that decides what can be paid today.