What I understand is that you are defending something that is fundamentally wrong. You are wrong.

I also understand that you will never admit that.

Hiding behind pedantry is always a good indicator, as if it were needed here.

You are entitled to believe it is fundamentally wrong. I have not expressed an opinion on that because it isn’t, and never has been, the issue. There’s nothing therefore to admit or deny.

The issue is that it is lawful for the bank to take whatever decisions it wants to take. If the government wants to change the law, then fine. Let them bring an Act before Parliament or amend a current one.

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.

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken." [Oliver Cromwell, 1650]

Well you’re wrong again.

I don’t know what the current review period is for PEPS with Coutts, and that would also depend on the risk classification of a PEP.

So at NatWest a PEP review was typically every 3 years. That may have changed and it’s entirely possible that Coutts review on a more regular basis.

All bank accounts are screened for suspicious activity. The regular man on the street can suddenly find his account blocked because a transaction on his account has triggered an alert. 99% of the time these are not genuine causes for concern but are ‘ false positives ‘ This screening is of course automated and sits in the background, but the follow up investigations are manually processed.

Farage had no suspicious transactions reported on his account.

I know you are concerned that the cost of these reviews could be prohibitive but most big banks, and NatWest Group is one such bank, have offshored these processes to low cost centres. In their case, Poland and India.

Back to Farage.

Far from causing any potential resource or expense issues in holding his accounts, Coutts were in the process of actually down grading his internal risk rating to that of a low level PEP. And that was from Medium to Low Risk. This was probably ( I can’t say for certain but this is what my experience tells me ) as a result of a review.

This would play into my original theory that somebody in Coutts - could be the RM could be a member of their WM Risk Committee , thought they could play the ‘ Values ‘ card and exit him. They determined that his views on Brexit, Immigration and ( ffs ) Climate Change were “ at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation “

How about Treating Customer Fairly - what happened to that ?

And don’t lecture me about what I want from my bank. And yes, if I care enough or it’s affecting their ability to deliver a service, I can move my account. My point is that all this trying to be ‘ fluffy and cuddly ‘ is neither desired or expected by me. Other people may see that as a reason for doing business with them - fine.

Old, Ungifted and White

Hard life hrolf, I feel sorry for you

It is essential to have some sort of routine. I exercise 6 days a week minimum, sometimes twice a day, so that is a reason to get up at a sensible time.
I have grandkids who we look after or visit 2 or 3 times a week. I look forward to them coming...and going.

I enjoy relaxation. I embrace doing nothing when I can. I know that some people can't just do nothing, and they have to fill their time with something perceived as purposeful. There are always jobs that need doing around the house if you want to, or if you don't.

Personally, I'm very happy not to work. I'm done with doing things I don't like, and I'm lucky enough to be able to afford to stop at my age.
When you work, you can't imagine not working, and when you stop, you can't imagine spending 5 or more days a week working.