What a surprise! You don’t think that either Brexit or Farage’s involvement it in were disasters, when it seems completely obvious to most clear thinkers that they were.

A bank then decides that having an association with someone whose role in that disaster is likely to come under ever heavier scrutiny is not in their best interests. Farage though presents this as them simply objecting to his politics and people like you swallow his lies again.

The government jump on the bandwagon not only because they are still scared of him but also to show they are not scared of their paymasters but on the side of the common man.

It discredits everyone involved.

If the bank thought having Blair as a customer harmed them, and he was one, then I have no doubt he would receive the same treatment. The difference is it wouldn’t be known about because a loudmouth decided to make political capital from it.

Who knows if they have treated Blair in that way? I don’t think it’s likely but I don’t know.

If you owned a bank you would come to different decisions, but have only a handful of customers.

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.

You don’t have to agree with something to accept a verdict!

I think the UKSC judgement in the gay cake case was flawed and will be corrected, in time, by primary legislation or by another case which re-examines the issue. Until then we live with it.

If Trump manages to avoid conviction on all the charges he faces I doubt it will be as a result of non guilty verdicts. Unlikely, but still possible.

It’s more likely he will delay through legal shenanigans until next year, hoping to win the nomination, present himself as a martyr and get re-elected so he can then pardon himself of any guilty verdicts that have been given.

The US political system is well past its use by date and their justice system too integrated with it for anyone to have confidence in it.

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.

The irony of that would be lost by some on here.

There is no irony apart from the fact that coutts have screwed themselves.
I doubt that pension losses would be factored in to the wrongs of what they did.
Unless you would be ok if it happened to you like 1000s of others and being the little man you would have to accept it. NF has only defended himself, if that’s wrong then it really shows the difference between left and right !

I am not blaming Farage for the self inflicted wounds of the bank!

They are entirely responsible for them.

I am blaming Farage for inflaming the situation through his opportunism.

He has in no way been vindicated by the bank’s apology. That was due only by the bank breaking confidentiality. His deliberate misrepresentations of the event were not involved in that. He is just exploiting it for his own reasons.

The BBC’s apology doesn’t now really seem justified given the way they received their information from what ought to have been an impeccable source, although maybe they too should have questioned why confidentially was being breached and investigated further before publishing.

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.

A 40 page report on the wrongs and he’s inflaming the situation. How many pages has your claim needed whether right or wrong

Well he must be pleased that NF is setting up a reporting site for de banked individuals. No political motivation; just the cause and effect to them and businesses.

1. "Impeccable source". I've already covered this in previous posts. The BBC just accepted BS from someone with a vested interest in protecting their company. They didn't bother to verify the "source" which is why they have had to apologise because this was poor journalism.

2. You are upset about Farage weaponising the situation. Thousands of people have been in similar situations and couldn't get the attention of the media, he succeeded so good for him. I hope that this will shed a light on the unfair way that banks treat their customers.

By the way you have told us on here many times how you are in a legal dispute with the government and have been treated unfairly
and are fighting for justice.

If you could bring that much media attention to your case would you complain?

They brought all this on themselves.

One more point

Having a nap in the White House?