You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coutts VS Nigel Farage
October 28 2024 11.18am

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum.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 67 of 80 < 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 >

  

Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 Aug 23 8.56am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Spiderman

So would you accept without argument the bank’s decision? Off topic but it is not only readers/viewers of this outlets mentioned that think tsrans equality controversial

That depends on the circumstances. I might ask for an explanation. I could get a detailed reply, or a neutral one. That’s up to the bank. It’s their decision. If they choose to alienate me they can. I won’t deal with HSBC because of charges they levied many years ago. I have other choices. I currently have 6 accounts, plus a credit card, whilst my wife has 4, shuffling money between them to maximise the interest.

People can disapprove of trans equality all they like. Social progress is often unpopular in certain quarters. It is though off topic!

 


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 Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Spiderman Flag Horsham 05 Aug 23 8.58am Send a Private Message to Spiderman Add Spiderman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That doesn’t though specify who closed them. It does explain that the increased requirements placed on banks to monitor money laundering could be behind the increased numbers. If I ran a bank and the government expected me to do their work for them without reward then I might take the simple option and close anything doubtful rather than spending time looking.

Let’s see what comes out of the enquiry.

Is the enquiry not being led by an arch remainer, who has described brexiteersas xenophobic, racists who need to get in the modern world? I may be wrong but if not, any guesses how thee qualify will go?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 Aug 23 9.03am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Tim Gypsy Hill '64

That his opinions are controversial to the bank (and you) is irrelevant. His opinions were the reason he was debanked. His opinions are not controversial to everyone in this country. Hence the accusation of "cancelled by Coutts because of his views".

Not that you could ever accept that someone you dislike could be wronged.

That’s just wrong.

You are another who cannot understand the difference between the cause of something and the reason for it. If you want to go back a few pages. The reasons have been explained. They aren’t the opinions themselves. It’s that they are controversial opinions. They could equally be strident left wing opinion as strident right wing.

 


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 Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 Aug 23 9.09am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Spiderman

Is the enquiry not being led by an arch remainer, who has described brexiteersas xenophobic, racists who need to get in the modern world? I may be wrong but if not, any guesses how thee qualify will go?


I have no idea who it is or what their views on Brexit might be.

I do know that an enquiry into the closure of bank accounts by someone appointed by the FCA won’t be looking at Brexit but will have clear terms of reference and be expected to do their job objectively and professionally.

Casting aspersions on them before they have even started has echoes from the USA.

 


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 Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
cryrst Flag The garden of England 05 Aug 23 9.50am Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle


I have no idea who it is or what their views on Brexit might be.

I do know that an enquiry into the closure of bank accounts by someone appointed by the FCA won’t be looking at Brexit but will have clear terms of reference and be expected to do their job objectively and professionally.

Casting aspersions on them before they have even started has echoes from the USA.

Unlike you then !

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
NEILLO Flag Shoreham-by-Sea 05 Aug 23 10.16am Send a Private Message to NEILLO Add NEILLO as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

My reading of the process is that two considerations are reviewed. Firstly, if an account holder is a PEP whose public status is such that their account requires a lot more costly oversight than the income it generates, then closing it is considered. Secondly, if the account holder is someone whose public persona is regarded as potentially capable of causing reputational damage to the bank within their target market, that too might cause them to consider withdrawing service. If both considerations are found then the likelihood obviously increases.

If a bank targeted Mail and Express readers and watchers of GB News they might well think those who promoted trans equality controversial to their market.

That’s a matter for any business to determine itself.

You didn't read my post on this subject then, because you are totally wrong.

 


Old, Ungifted and White

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Teddy Eagle Flag 05 Aug 23 10.19am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That doesn’t though specify who closed them. It does explain that the increased requirements placed on banks to monitor money laundering could be behind the increased numbers. If I ran a bank and the government expected me to do their work for them without reward then I might take the simple option and close anything doubtful rather than spending time looking.

Let’s see what comes out of the enquiry.

In an article about debanking with the headline "UK banks are closing more than 1000 accounts a day" and subhead "data shows a big jump in customers being debanked", isn't it clear who's closing them?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
NEILLO Flag Shoreham-by-Sea 05 Aug 23 10.21am Send a Private Message to NEILLO Add NEILLO as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I expect many families do have just one account and for any in joint names only the PEP would lose access, thus preserving the ability to function. That’s just a presumption though. Even if the account was closed it would surely be a simple matter for the non PEP part of the family to transfer everything to a new account in their name with the notice given?

How could money be lost? They aren’t raiding the account. They are closing it.

Wrong again.
PEPS also include family members. Here's the definition ;

This definition is extended to include family members and known close associates of a PEP. These are commonly called RCAs – Relatives or Close Associates and the rules that apply to PEPs apply also to RCAs. Family members include spouses, partners, parent, sibling, child, partner, or spouse of the child

 


Old, Ungifted and White

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
NEILLO Flag Shoreham-by-Sea 05 Aug 23 10.50am Send a Private Message to NEILLO Add NEILLO as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

In that nobody died, that’s true, but it was never the case in the bakery case. That was always about exposing discrimination.

There was no discrimination involved with Farage. He wasn’t debanked for his opinions. He was debanked because those opinions were controversial. If they were controversial left wing opinions he would have been equally at risk.

Of course, Farage claims otherwise and people like you buy his spinning so there’s little chance of you seeing that.

He was debanked for his '' controversial '' opinions. Yes, they could equally have been left wing.

Controversial that is in Coutts opinion - they were not are are not seen as controversial by a good percentage of the population. And that's what enables the Discrimination card.

 


Old, Ungifted and White

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
NEILLO Flag Shoreham-by-Sea 05 Aug 23 10.56am Send a Private Message to NEILLO Add NEILLO as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle


I have no idea who it is or what their views on Brexit might be.

I do know that an enquiry into the closure of bank accounts by someone appointed by the FCA won’t be looking at Brexit but will have clear terms of reference and be expected to do their job objectively and professionally.

Casting aspersions on them before they have even started has echoes from the USA.

The scope of the FCA should be looking to see that customers that were exited were treated fairly and that there were sound business justification for having their accounts closed.

It could possibly find account closures made by banks that suspect their clients ( rightly or wrongly ) are involved in criminal activities of some kind. In those instances the banks report the suspicious activities to the authorities but do not tell the clients as that would be tipping them off.

 


Old, Ungifted and White

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
HKOwen Flag Hong Kong 05 Aug 23 11.09am Send a Private Message to HKOwen Add HKOwen as a friend

The cause of Farage being de-banked by Coutts was a decision by an internal committee.

The reason was senior managers at Coutts and Natwest want to be able to control the thinking and behaviour of customers, moral arbiters and virtue signallers .

Simple as that

 


Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
HKOwen Flag Hong Kong 05 Aug 23 11.11am Send a Private Message to HKOwen Add HKOwen as a friend

Originally posted by NEILLO

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I expect many families do have just one account and for any in joint names only the PEP would lose access, thus preserving the ability to function. That’s just a presumption though. Even if the account was closed it would surely be a simple matter for the non PEP part of the family to transfer everything to a new account in their name with the notice given?

How could money be lost? They aren’t raiding the account. They are closing it.

Wrong again.
PEPS also include family members. Here's the definition ;

This definition is extended to include family members and known close associates of a PEP. These are commonly called RCAs – Relatives or Close Associates and the rules that apply to PEPs apply also to RCAs. Family members include spouses, partners, parent, sibling, child, partner, or spouse of the child

The lack of knowledge is not very surprising. No doubt you will get a mea culpa for the erroneous post

 


Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

  

Page 67 of 80 < 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coutts VS Nigel Farage