Coutts VS Nigel Farage

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Coutts VS Nigel Farage

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 38 of 80 < 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 >

Teddy Eagle 29 Jul 23 2.10pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle It did, and that is not in dispute. It was careless to minute such remarks and an apology has been given for the language used. Read them very carefully again though and perhaps you will see that whilst they are describing his perceived character they aren't the reason for his debanking. The reason for his debanking is not of themselves Farage's views. It is their impact on the bank's position and purpose. They are not saying that Farage cannot hold and speak about such views, but that they don't feel it's wise for them to be connected to him. Now some will regard that as just semantics but it isn't. It's a fundamental right that people can decide for themselves who they associate with, on whatever basis they want. If you dislike me, for whatever reason, no one else can force you to associate yourself with me. A commercial business is no different unless they have some kind of legal compulsion, which I expect would be vigorously resisted if there was any attempt to introduce one. Coutts thought being associated with Farage was bad for how they might be perceived. [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

29 Jul 23 2.10pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

It did, and that is not in dispute. It was careless to minute such remarks and an apology has been given for the language used.

Read them very carefully again though and perhaps you will see that whilst they are describing his perceived character they aren't the reason for his debanking.

The reason for his debanking is not of themselves Farage's views. It is their impact on the bank's position and purpose.

They are not saying that Farage cannot hold and speak about such views, but that they don't feel it's wise for them to be connected to him.

Now some will regard that as just semantics but it isn't.

It's a fundamental right that people can decide for themselves who they associate with, on whatever basis they want. If you dislike me, for whatever reason, no one else can force you to associate yourself with me.

A commercial business is no different unless they have some kind of legal compulsion, which I expect would be vigorously resisted if there was any attempt to introduce one.

Coutts thought being associated with Farage was bad for how they might be perceived.

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 2.13pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger 72.3% of people in the street? Have you seen the streets these days? I doubt that figures on Brexit have much credibility. I seem to recall that the poles said that we were remaining. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (29 Jul 2023 1.56pm) Do you trust YouGov? Knowing your previous positions on such things, probably not, but this indicates where things are:- [Link] For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 2.13pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

72.3% of people in the street? Have you seen the streets these days?
I doubt that figures on Brexit have much credibility.

I seem to recall that the poles said that we were remaining.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (29 Jul 2023 1.56pm)

Do you trust YouGov? Knowing your previous positions on such things, probably not, but this indicates where things are:-

[Link]

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 29 Jul 23 2.20pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Do you trust YouGov? Knowing your previous positions on such things, probably not, but this indicates where things are:- [Link] I don't trust polls full stop. You couldn't accept that the majority voted for Brexit, but now you are happy to tell us about a poll because it appears to show something you approve of. Could it be that people are still as easily lead by propaganda as you claimed they were when they voted for Brexit. You can't have it both ways old boy. There are no grounds to call Brexit a failure. It's only a failure if you want to be ruled from Brussels. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (29 Jul 2023 2.44pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

29 Jul 23 2.20pm

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Do you trust YouGov? Knowing your previous positions on such things, probably not, but this indicates where things are:-

[Link]

I don't trust polls full stop.

You couldn't accept that the majority voted for Brexit, but now you are happy to tell us about a poll because it appears to show something you approve of.

Could it be that people are still as easily lead by propaganda as you claimed they were when they voted for Brexit.

You can't have it both ways old boy.

There are no grounds to call Brexit a failure. It's only a failure if you want to be ruled from Brussels.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (29 Jul 2023 2.44pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

NEILLO Shoreham-by-Sea 29 Jul 23 2.25pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle No, what I said is that whilst there is arguing, there is no substance to the argument being pontificated by Farage and his supporters. His freedom of speech has demonstrably and unarguably not been negatively affected by this. Coutts should be, and are, free to make whatever decision they believe to be right. Unless you believe they should be nationalised or regulated as a public utility. I don't think the financial sector would be too enthusiastic about the latter. I have little doubt they try to exclude all the criminals you describe. That's irrelevant to also looking at other perceived risks. I also think though that there will be many more heads rolling as they sort out the mess. I am though doing my best to help NatWest. I have just opened a cash ISA with them as their interest rates are now the market leader. That I agree with their position on Farage is beside the point. No, what you said was “ there is no freedom of speech argument “ - check if you can be bothered. Coutts is part of the NatWest Group as you are aware - you also know that the Government still has a 39% share in its ownership. I’m not remotely suggesting that it should be (re) nationalised. My comment on focusing on the REAL threats through Financial Crime was based upon my own experience of over 45 years in the Banking industry. In which time I had regional responsibility for conducting Client Due Diligence on a wide spectrum of customers including PEPS. I think the next major internal risk review that Coutts conduct may well be into whether the policies that created this mess are actually fit for purpose. Old, Ungifted and White
Alert a moderator to this post

NEILLO

Shoreham-by-Sea 29 Jul 23 2.25pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

No, what I said is that whilst there is arguing, there is no substance to the argument being pontificated by Farage and his supporters. His freedom of speech has demonstrably and unarguably not been negatively affected by this.

Coutts should be, and are, free to make whatever decision they believe to be right. Unless you believe they should be nationalised or regulated as a public utility. I don't think the financial sector would be too enthusiastic about the latter.

I have little doubt they try to exclude all the criminals you describe. That's irrelevant to also looking at other perceived risks.

I also think though that there will be many more heads rolling as they sort out the mess.

I am though doing my best to help NatWest. I have just opened a cash ISA with them as their interest rates are now the market leader.

That I agree with their position on Farage is beside the point.

No, what you said was “ there is no freedom of speech argument “ - check if you can be bothered.

Coutts is part of the NatWest Group as you are aware - you also know that the Government still has a 39% share in its ownership. I’m not remotely suggesting that it should be (re) nationalised.

My comment on focusing on the REAL threats through Financial Crime was based upon my own experience of over 45 years in the Banking industry. In which time I had regional responsibility for conducting Client Due Diligence on a wide spectrum of customers including PEPS.

I think the next major internal risk review that Coutts conduct may well be into whether the policies that created this mess are actually fit for purpose.

Old, Ungifted and White

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 29 Jul 23 2.38pm
Originally posted by NEILLO No, what you said was “ there is no freedom of speech argument “ - check if you can be bothered. Coutts is part of the NatWest Group as you are aware - you also know that the Government still has a 39% share in its ownership. I’m not remotely suggesting that it should be (re) nationalised. My comment on focusing on the REAL threats through Financial Crime was based upon my own experience of over 45 years in the Banking industry. In which time I had regional responsibility for conducting Client Due Diligence on a wide spectrum of customers including PEPS. I think the next major internal risk review that Coutts conduct may well be into whether the policies that created this mess are actually fit for purpose. New Client "I'd like to open an account please. I'm a rich Saudi / arms dealer / money launderer / can't explain where I got my wealth from but my husband being President of his country and under investigation is purely a coincidence. Coutt's "That'll do nicely (unless your Farage). Actually I'm think of approaching my bank (Any UK bank) to discuss reputation risk. Do I wish to be associated with a bank whose senior management continually flouts the law and is always being sanctioned for the FSA. * And they have the cheek to question my reputation. *Decades of financial scandals / money laundering / market rigging etc. etc. Edited by Badger11 (29 Jul 2023 2.43pm) One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 29 Jul 23 2.38pm

Originally posted by NEILLO

No, what you said was “ there is no freedom of speech argument “ - check if you can be bothered.

Coutts is part of the NatWest Group as you are aware - you also know that the Government still has a 39% share in its ownership. I’m not remotely suggesting that it should be (re) nationalised.

I think the next major internal risk review that Coutts conduct may well be into whether the policies that created this mess are actually fit for purpose.

New Client "I'd like to open an account please. I'm a rich Saudi / arms dealer / money launderer / can't explain where I got my wealth from but my husband being President of his country and under investigation is purely a coincidence.

Coutt's "That'll do nicely (unless your Farage).

Actually I'm think of approaching my bank (Any UK bank) to discuss reputation risk.

Do I wish to be associated with a bank whose senior management continually flouts the law and is always being sanctioned for the FSA. *

And they have the cheek to question my reputation.

*Decades of financial scandals / money laundering / market rigging etc. etc.

Edited by Badger11 (29 Jul 2023 2.43pm)

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 3.44pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger I don't trust polls full stop. You couldn't accept that the majority voted for Brexit, but now you are happy to tell us about a poll because it appears to show something you approve of. Could it be that people are still as easily lead by propaganda as you claimed they were when they voted for Brexit. You can't have it both ways old boy. There are no grounds to call Brexit a failure. It's only a failure if you want to be ruled from Brussels. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (29 Jul 2023 2.44pm) A majority didn't vote for Brexit. A majority of those who voted, voted for Brexit and I accept that. What I don't accept that it was a wise or even legitimate process. That poll could have a huge margin of error and still indicate that a majority now disapprove. Which is hardly surprising given the closeness of the original vote. There's no propaganda needed for people to change their minds. They are witnessing the stupidity every day personally. Only those, like you, for whom not being in the EU was an over-riding demand whatever the economic and security consequences don't now accept it is a failure. Not all those who voted for it by a very big margin. Those who thought it would save money or reduce immigration now know they were conned. Many of us knew that in 2016. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 3.44pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I don't trust polls full stop.

You couldn't accept that the majority voted for Brexit, but now you are happy to tell us about a poll because it appears to show something you approve of.

Could it be that people are still as easily lead by propaganda as you claimed they were when they voted for Brexit.

You can't have it both ways old boy.

There are no grounds to call Brexit a failure. It's only a failure if you want to be ruled from Brussels.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (29 Jul 2023 2.44pm)

A majority didn't vote for Brexit. A majority of those who voted, voted for Brexit and I accept that. What I don't accept that it was a wise or even legitimate process.

That poll could have a huge margin of error and still indicate that a majority now disapprove. Which is hardly surprising given the closeness of the original vote.

There's no propaganda needed for people to change their minds. They are witnessing the stupidity every day personally.

Only those, like you, for whom not being in the EU was an over-riding demand whatever the economic and security consequences don't now accept it is a failure. Not all those who voted for it by a very big margin. Those who thought it would save money or reduce immigration now know they were conned. Many of us knew that in 2016.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 3.52pm
Originally posted by NEILLO No, what you said was “ there is no freedom of speech argument “ - check if you can be bothered. Coutts is part of the NatWest Group as you are aware - you also know that the Government still has a 39% share in its ownership. I’m not remotely suggesting that it should be (re) nationalised. My comment on focusing on the REAL threats through Financial Crime was based upon my own experience of over 45 years in the Banking industry. In which time I had regional responsibility for conducting Client Due Diligence on a wide spectrum of customers including PEPS. I think the next major internal risk review that Coutts conduct may well be into whether the policies that created this mess are actually fit for purpose. No need to check. I know what I wrote and have said that I regarded your criticism as being pedantic as it's really obvious what was meant. There is no valid freedom of speech argument. There is merely freedom of speech arguing. As I have already explained. With your background, you will be better able to understand the points being made and may well be correct that they will decide to revise their approach, for no other reason than the need to repair their imagine. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 3.52pm

Originally posted by NEILLO

No, what you said was “ there is no freedom of speech argument “ - check if you can be bothered.

Coutts is part of the NatWest Group as you are aware - you also know that the Government still has a 39% share in its ownership. I’m not remotely suggesting that it should be (re) nationalised.

I think the next major internal risk review that Coutts conduct may well be into whether the policies that created this mess are actually fit for purpose.

No need to check. I know what I wrote and have said that I regarded your criticism as being pedantic as it's really obvious what was meant. There is no valid freedom of speech argument. There is merely freedom of speech arguing. As I have already explained.

With your background, you will be better able to understand the points being made and may well be correct that they will decide to revise their approach, for no other reason than the need to repair their imagine.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 3.55pm
Originally posted by Badger11 New Client "I'd like to open an account please. I'm a rich Saudi / arms dealer / money launderer / can't explain where I got my wealth from but my husband being President of his country and under investigation is purely a coincidence. Coutt's "That'll do nicely (unless your Farage). Actually I'm think of approaching my bank (Any UK bank) to discuss reputation risk. Do I wish to be associated with a bank whose senior management continually flouts the law and is always being sanctioned for the FSA. * And they have the cheek to question my reputation. *Decades of financial scandals / money laundering / market rigging etc. etc. Edited by Badger11 (29 Jul 2023 2.43pm) You don't seriously believe that do you! I have opened a NatWest account today to show solidarity with them. Well actually, no. I did it because their rates are highest. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 3.55pm

Originally posted by Badger11

Coutt's "That'll do nicely (unless your Farage).

Actually I'm think of approaching my bank (Any UK bank) to discuss reputation risk.

Do I wish to be associated with a bank whose senior management continually flouts the law and is always being sanctioned for the FSA. *

And they have the cheek to question my reputation.

*Decades of financial scandals / money laundering / market rigging etc. etc.

Edited by Badger11 (29 Jul 2023 2.43pm)

You don't seriously believe that do you!

I have opened a NatWest account today to show solidarity with them. Well actually, no. I did it because their rates are highest.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 29 Jul 23 3.56pm
'Populism is bad'....except when it agrees with me. Apparently voting for Brexit promises like reducing immigration is pointless because the elites do what they and big business/donors want anyway, regardless of what the manifestos say. The point of Democracy is what exactly? It seems a bit contradictory to care about what opinion polls may say if you're an avowed opponent of populism.....but apparently that's only when it disagrees with them. Before Johnson was elected and Brexit pushed through remainers went full in on rejecting any kind of Brexit, hard or soft. They would do anything for another vote and even worse control the campaign rules to advantage Remain...Regardless they were quite happy to completely ignore the majority who had just voted for Brexit. Indeed, it was this undemocratic attitude that probably contributed to the 80 seat majority......People were annoyed that their vote was being played around with. Regardless, It's a notable point that a vote on leaving the EU was ignored....despite the opinion polls at many times showing majority support for it....for 40 years. I remember EU supporters no caring at all about opinion polls then.....just as they didn't care about majority opinions against immigration and for capital punishment....ignored for decades. So I guess, tough cheese. The shoe is on the other foot. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Jul 2023 4.02pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

29 Jul 23 3.56pm

'Populism is bad'....except when it agrees with me.

Apparently voting for Brexit promises like reducing immigration is pointless because the elites do what they and big business/donors want anyway, regardless of what the manifestos say.

The point of Democracy is what exactly?

It seems a bit contradictory to care about what opinion polls may say if you're an avowed opponent of populism.....but apparently that's only when it disagrees with them.

Before Johnson was elected and Brexit pushed through remainers went full in on rejecting any kind of Brexit, hard or soft. They would do anything for another vote and even worse control the campaign rules to advantage Remain...Regardless they were quite happy to completely ignore the majority who had just voted for Brexit.

Indeed, it was this undemocratic attitude that probably contributed to the 80 seat majority......People were annoyed that their vote was being played around with.

Regardless, It's a notable point that a vote on leaving the EU was ignored....despite the opinion polls at many times showing majority support for it....for 40 years.

I remember EU supporters no caring at all about opinion polls then.....just as they didn't care about majority opinions against immigration and for capital punishment....ignored for decades.

So I guess, tough cheese.

The shoe is on the other foot.

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Jul 2023 4.02pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 29 Jul 23 3.59pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle You don't seriously believe that do you! I have opened a NatWest account today to show solidarity with them. Well actually, no. I did it because their rates are highest. Opened an account at the same bank as Nigel Farage? Just for financial gain? OK.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

29 Jul 23 3.59pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

You don't seriously believe that do you!

I have opened a NatWest account today to show solidarity with them. Well actually, no. I did it because their rates are highest.

Opened an account at the same bank as Nigel Farage? Just for financial gain? OK.

Alert a moderator to this post

NEILLO Shoreham-by-Sea 29 Jul 23 4.00pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle No need to check. I know what I wrote and have said that I regarded your criticism as being pedantic as it's really obvious what was meant. There is no valid freedom of speech argument. There is merely freedom of speech arguing. As I have already explained. With your background, you will be better able to understand the points being made and may well be correct that they will decide to revise their approach, for no other reason than the need to repair their imagine. Of course no need to check but you have contradicted yourself. And you’re doing it again with your “ no valid freedom of speech “ argument- I think you’ll find there is but I don’t think you’ll bother looking because you refuse to see it. It’s just your opinion which you continue to present, incorrectly, as fact. Old, Ungifted and White
Alert a moderator to this post

NEILLO

Shoreham-by-Sea 29 Jul 23 4.00pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Of course no need to check but you have contradicted yourself.

And you’re doing it again with your “ no valid freedom of speech “ argument- I think you’ll find there is but I don’t think you’ll bother looking because you refuse to see it. It’s just your opinion which you continue to present, incorrectly, as fact.

Old, Ungifted and White

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 4.05pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle Coutts thought being associated with Farage was bad for how they might be perceived. [Link] Farage does his thing openly. What the Guardian reports is a sophisticated criminal money laundering scheme which requires thorough investigation by specialists. That's the job of the police or financial authorities and probably beyond the capacity of any individual bank. Their role would be limited to reporting suspicious activity. Who knows if they did? For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 29 Jul 23 4.05pm

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Coutts thought being associated with Farage was bad for how they might be perceived.

[Link]

Farage does his thing openly. What the Guardian reports is a sophisticated criminal money laundering scheme which requires thorough investigation by specialists. That's the job of the police or financial authorities and probably beyond the capacity of any individual bank. Their role would be limited to reporting suspicious activity. Who knows if they did?

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 38 of 80 < 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Coutts VS Nigel Farage

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors