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This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum.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

Visit the current forum | Forum Rules

Page 34 of 48 < 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 >

NEILLO Shoreham-by-Sea 01 Aug 23 5.01pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle That would be all of them excluded then, for they are obliged to monitor them all. Again, you are not answering the question. We all know that PEPS are regularly monitored, that's not the issue. As NE14T suggests, any PEPS ' debanked ' for reasons other than Financial Crime suspicions should be explained. Old, Ungifted and White

NEILLO

Shoreham-by-Sea 01 Aug 23 5.01pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That would be all of them excluded then, for they are obliged to monitor them all.

Again, you are not answering the question.

We all know that PEPS are regularly monitored, that's not the issue.

As NE14T suggests, any PEPS ' debanked ' for reasons other than Financial Crime suspicions should be explained.

Old, Ungifted and White

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 5.02pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle Brilliant. So now all he needs to do is outrage a few folk and get his account stopped then make a fuss and get it back with another load of compo. Rinse and repeat. I suspect they would have a lawyer handle another closure and not have any internal documents at all. 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.

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 5.02pm

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Brilliant. So now all he needs to do is outrage a few folk and get his account stopped then make a fuss and get it back with another load of compo. Rinse and repeat.

I suspect they would have a lawyer handle another closure and not have any internal documents at all.

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.

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 5.03pm
Originally posted by NEILLO Again, you are not answering the question. We all know that PEPS are regularly monitored, that's not the issue. As NE14T suggests, any PEPS ' debanked ' for reasons other than Financial Crime suspicions should be explained. Fine. Let that be a regulation. It isn't now. That's the point. 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.

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 5.03pm

Originally posted by NEILLO

Again, you are not answering the question.

We all know that PEPS are regularly monitored, that's not the issue.

As NE14T suggests, any PEPS ' debanked ' for reasons other than Financial Crime suspicions should be explained.

Fine. Let that be a regulation. It isn't now. That's the point.

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.

georgenorman 01 Aug 23 5.55pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle You and Orwell should get a room. Though you would probably suit Orville better. Both being equally childish. Room 101?

georgenorman

01 Aug 23 5.55pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

You and Orwell should get a room.

Though you would probably suit Orville better. Both being equally childish.

Room 101?

cryrst The garden of England 01 Aug 23 6.16pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Not many people think about this as objectively as I do. Many read the Mail, Sun or other newspapers and don’t think out of the box. I suspect that the NatWest Board took this decision through gritted teeth and under a lot of political pressure. Not because they believe their approach to this subject is wrong. I would love to be a fly on the wall at their next meeting with other banks because I suspect they will be furious at the cave in. Well it seems niello has the contacts to do just that, you don’t so maybe unfriending him has backfired

cryrst

The garden of England 01 Aug 23 6.16pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Not many people think about this as objectively as I do. Many read the Mail, Sun or other newspapers and don’t think out of the box.

I suspect that the NatWest Board took this decision through gritted teeth and under a lot of political pressure. Not because they believe their approach to this subject is wrong. I would love to be a fly on the wall at their next meeting with other banks because I suspect they will be furious at the cave in.

Well it seems niello has the contacts to do just that, you don’t so maybe unfriending him has backfired

cryrst The garden of England 01 Aug 23 6.17pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle That may be true, and may well be seen in hindsight as a badly thought through policy. Doesn’t change their right to do it. Banks are allowed to be stupid. And “it’s their right” is all you have in this whole thread. Everything else is just lefty claptrap.

cryrst

The garden of England 01 Aug 23 6.17pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That may be true, and may well be seen in hindsight as a badly thought through policy.

Doesn’t change their right to do it. Banks are allowed to be stupid.

And “it’s their right” is all you have in this whole thread. Everything else is just lefty claptrap.

Hrolf The Ganger 01 Aug 23 8.41pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle That’s for the bank to assess. It’s their business. Not yours or mine. I don’t think it’s likely that your examples will be regarded as threats, but it’s not up to me. Let's cut through the crap. A bank can currently close an account if it wants to. In this example, a purple haired woman closed his account because of who he is and his politics. This you describe as a reputational risk. If banks continue to be allowed to do this, then there is no real limit on whose accounts can be closed or why they are closed. This could lead to a whole section of society having their accounts closed arbitrarily by the decision of an individual or individuals because they are considered a risk. Since bank accounts are becoming increasingly necessary in order to function in society, this would be catastrophic for the individuals concerned and all caused simply because of things such as their politics, who they associate with or any number of other behaviours that are normal in a free country. The only answer therefore is to make it a human right to have a bank account, and for anyone closing accounts on the basis described to be prosecuted. Some things are even more important than business and the right to a life without persecution, corporate or otherwise, should be one of them.

Hrolf The Ganger

01 Aug 23 8.41pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That’s for the bank to assess. It’s their business. Not yours or mine. I don’t think it’s likely that your examples will be regarded as threats, but it’s not up to me.

Let's cut through the crap.

A bank can currently close an account if it wants to.

In this example, a purple haired woman closed his account because of who he is and his politics. This you describe as a reputational risk.

If banks continue to be allowed to do this, then there is no real limit on whose accounts can be closed or why they are closed.
This could lead to a whole section of society having their accounts closed arbitrarily by the decision of an individual or individuals because they are considered a risk.

Since bank accounts are becoming increasingly necessary in order to function in society, this would be catastrophic for the individuals concerned and all caused simply because of things such as their politics, who they associate with or any number of other behaviours that are normal in a free country.

The only answer therefore is to make it a human right to have a bank account, and for anyone closing accounts on the basis described to be prosecuted.

Some things are even more important than business and the right to a life without persecution, corporate or otherwise, should be one of them.

HKOwen Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 10.00pm
Originally posted by georgenorman Room 101? I wouldn't inflict that on a poor rat 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.

HKOwen

Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 10.00pm

Originally posted by georgenorman

Room 101?

I wouldn't inflict that on a poor rat

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.

HKOwen Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 10.03pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger Let's cut through the crap. A bank can currently close an account if it wants to. In this example, a purple haired woman closed his account because of who he is and his politics. This you describe as a reputational risk. If banks continue to be allowed to do this, then there is no real limit on whose accounts can be closed or why they are closed. This could lead to a whole section of society having their accounts closed arbitrarily by the decision of an individual or individuals because they are considered a risk. Since bank accounts are becoming increasingly necessary in order to function in society, this would be catastrophic for the individuals concerned and all caused simply because of things such as their politics, who they associate with or any number of other behaviours that are normal in a free country. The only answer therefore is to make it a human right to have a bank account, and for anyone closing accounts on the basis described to be prosecuted. Some things are even more important than business and the right to a life without persecution, corporate or otherwise, should be one of them. I would agree to make it a legal obligation for banks operating in the UK to provide banking facilities to legal residents of the UK. As a human right , no way. 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.

HKOwen

Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 10.03pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Let's cut through the crap.

A bank can currently close an account if it wants to.

In this example, a purple haired woman closed his account because of who he is and his politics. This you describe as a reputational risk.

The only answer therefore is to make it a human right to have a bank account, and for anyone closing accounts on the basis described to be prosecuted.

Some things are even more important than business and the right to a life without persecution, corporate or otherwise, should be one of them.

I would agree to make it a legal obligation for banks operating in the UK to provide banking facilities to legal residents of the UK. As a human right , no way.

HKOwen Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 10.12pm
Originally posted by Matov My once every 6 month(ish) expression of my utter puzzlement as to why so many of you bright and erudite people waste a single moment engaging with this village idiot? Exactly this 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.

HKOwen

Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 10.12pm

Originally posted by Matov

My once every 6 month(ish) expression of my utter puzzlement as to why so many of you bright and erudite people waste a single moment engaging with this village idiot?

Exactly this

HKOwen Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 10.14pm
Originally posted by NEILLO Again, you are not answering the question. We all know that PEPs are regularly monitored, that's not the issue. As NE14T suggests, any PEPs ' debanked ' for reasons other than Financial Crime suspicions should be explained. There is nothing shown so far that the thousands of debanked were PEPs. Many seem to be just folk who disagreed with something like pronoun policy or similar. PEPs are just the tip of the iceberg Edited by HKOwen (01 Aug 2023 10.23pm) 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.

HKOwen

Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 10.14pm

Originally posted by NEILLO

Again, you are not answering the question.

We all know that PEPs are regularly monitored, that's not the issue.

As NE14T suggests, any PEPs ' debanked ' for reasons other than Financial Crime suspicions should be explained.

There is nothing shown so far that the thousands of debanked were PEPs. Many seem to be just folk who disagreed with something like pronoun policy or similar.

PEPs are just the tip of the iceberg

Edited by HKOwen (01 Aug 2023 10.23pm)

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 10.28pm
Originally posted by cryrst And “it’s their right” is all you have in this whole thread. Everything else is just lefty claptrap. Kindly explain what you regard as “lefty” about bank’s operating as all business’s do. Which is to care fo4 their bottom line. 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.

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 10.28pm

Originally posted by cryrst

And “it’s their right” is all you have in this whole thread. Everything else is just lefty claptrap.

Kindly explain what you regard as “lefty” about bank’s operating as all business’s do. Which is to care fo4 their bottom line.

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.

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 10.37pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger Let's cut through the crap. A bank can currently close an account if it wants to. In this example, a purple haired woman closed his account because of who he is and his politics. This you describe as a reputational risk. If banks continue to be allowed to do this, then there is no real limit on whose accounts can be closed or why they are closed. This could lead to a whole section of society having their accounts closed arbitrarily by the decision of an individual or individuals because they are considered a risk. Since bank accounts are becoming increasingly necessary in order to function in society, this would be catastrophic for the individuals concerned and all caused simply because of things such as their politics, who they associate with or any number of other behaviours that are normal in a free country. The only answer therefore is to make it a human right to have a bank account, and for anyone closing accounts on the basis described to be prosecuted. Some things are even more important than business and the right to a life without persecution, corporate or otherwise, should be one of them. Who knows what their assessment process involved. That’s for the bank alone. It’s their business not mine or yours. You can decide that the colour of hair, or anything else, matters for your business but not their’s. Whether holding a bank account should be regarded as a basic right is a totally separate issue to this. I think it probably is, and that basic accounts should be offered to all who are legally entitled to 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.

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 10.37pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Let's cut through the crap.

A bank can currently close an account if it wants to.

In this example, a purple haired woman closed his account because of who he is and his politics. This you describe as a reputational risk.

The only answer therefore is to make it a human right to have a bank account, and for anyone closing accounts on the basis described to be prosecuted.

Some things are even more important than business and the right to a life without persecution, corporate or otherwise, should be one of them.

Who knows what their assessment process involved. That’s for the bank alone. It’s their business not mine or yours. You can decide that the colour of hair, or anything else, matters for your business but not their’s.

Whether holding a bank account should be regarded as a basic right is a totally separate issue to this. I think it probably is, and that basic accounts should be offered to all who are legally entitled to 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.

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 10.42pm
Originally posted by HKOwen There is nothing shown so far that the thousands of debanked were PEPs. Many seem to be just folk who disagreed with something like pronoun policy or similar. PEPs are just the tip of the iceberg Edited by HKOwen (01 Aug 2023 10.23pm) That’s for the banks to answer if answers are made mandatory.. They aren’t now. I suspect there are solid reasons why those. accounts are unprofitable. 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.

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 10.42pm

Originally posted by HKOwen

There is nothing shown so far that the thousands of debanked were PEPs. Many seem to be just folk who disagreed with something like pronoun policy or similar.

PEPs are just the tip of the iceberg

Edited by HKOwen (01 Aug 2023 10.23pm)

That’s for the banks to answer if answers are made mandatory.. They aren’t now.

I suspect there are solid reasons why those. accounts are unprofitable.

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.

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 10.44pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Kindly explain what you regard as “lefty” about bank’s operating as all business’s do. Which is to care about their bottom line. 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.

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 01 Aug 23 10.44pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Kindly explain what you regard as “lefty” about bank’s operating as all business’s do. Which is to care about their bottom line.

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.

Teddy Eagle 01 Aug 23 10.46pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I suspect they would have a lawyer handle another closure and not have any internal documents at all. What's the difference?

Teddy Eagle

01 Aug 23 10.46pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I suspect they would have a lawyer handle another closure and not have any internal documents at all.

What's the difference?

Stirlingsays 01 Aug 23 10.58pm
How can banks be allowed to close accounts that aren't profitable when they were bailed out along with the whole system when they weren't profitable? In the past a bank closing an account wouldn't matter as much but in the new system where cash is becoming less used a bank account is a requirement to live properly. When I look at the money being earned by management in banks I just find this argument on profits slightly ridiculous. Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2023 12.44am) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

01 Aug 23 10.58pm

How can banks be allowed to close accounts that aren't profitable when they were bailed out along with the whole system when they weren't profitable?

In the past a bank closing an account wouldn't matter as much but in the new system where cash is becoming less used a bank account is a requirement to live properly.

When I look at the money being earned by management in banks I just find this argument on profits slightly ridiculous.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2023 12.44am)

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

HKOwen Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 11.12pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays How can banks be allowed to close accounts that aren't profitable when they were bailed out along with the whole system when they weren't profitable? In the past a bank closing an account wouldn't matter as much but in the new system where cash is becoming less used a bank account is a requirement to live properly. When I look at the money being earned by management in banks I just find this argument slightly ridiculous. There is a parallel with Royal Mail not wanting to deliver to non profitable remoter areas. I would support a relaunch of a govt owned bank that provided services to individuals only, cards, savings accounts and basic operating functions, no mortgages , no commercial loans.Debit cards only not credit cards, make it as risk free as possible. 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.

HKOwen

Hong Kong 01 Aug 23 11.12pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

How can banks be allowed to close accounts that aren't profitable when they were bailed out along with the whole system when they weren't profitable?

In the past a bank closing an account wouldn't matter as much but in the new system where cash is becoming less used a bank account is a requirement to live properly.

When I look at the money being earned by management in banks I just find this argument slightly ridiculous.

There is a parallel with Royal Mail not wanting to deliver to non profitable remoter areas. I would support a relaunch of a govt owned bank that provided services to individuals only, cards, savings accounts and basic operating functions, no mortgages , no commercial loans.Debit cards only not credit cards, make it as risk free as possible.

Stirlingsays 02 Aug 23 12.46am
Originally posted by HKOwen There is a parallel with Royal Mail not wanting to deliver to non profitable remoter areas. I would support a relaunch of a govt owned bank that provided services to individuals only, cards, savings accounts and basic operating functions, no mortgages , no commercial loans.Debit cards only not credit cards, make it as risk free as possible. There are far more knowledgeable people on Hol concerning the finance world than me but taken as a layman it did seem one of Corbyn's better ideas. Wouldn't it create a two tier banking system though? Don't know. Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2023 12.47am) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

02 Aug 23 12.46am

Originally posted by HKOwen

There are far more knowledgeable people on Hol concerning the finance world than me but taken as a layman it did seem one of Corbyn's better ideas.

Wouldn't it create a two tier banking system though? Don't know.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2023 12.47am)

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

HKOwen Hong Kong 02 Aug 23 6.58am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays There are far more knowledgeable people on Hol concerning the finance world than me but taken as a layman it did seem one of Corbyn's better ideas. Wouldn't it create a two tier banking system though? Don't know. Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2023 12.47am) I don't have a problem with a two tier system. The second tier being functional and the other tier acting commercially. I don't like big government but I have an issue with for example water being privatised. For rail, where there is no competition due to geographical nature of services we need to get some expertise from Italy where the public/private model is excellent and lots of people use trains as they are inexpensive comparatively and efficient. 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.

HKOwen

Hong Kong 02 Aug 23 6.58am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

There are far more knowledgeable people on Hol concerning the finance world than me but taken as a layman it did seem one of Corbyn's better ideas.

Wouldn't it create a two tier banking system though? Don't know.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2023 12.47am)

I don't have a problem with a two tier system. The second tier being functional and the other tier acting commercially.

I don't like big government but I have an issue with for example water being privatised.

For rail, where there is no competition due to geographical nature of services we need to get some expertise from Italy where the public/private model is excellent and lots of people use trains as they are inexpensive comparatively and efficient.

Page 34 of 48 < 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 >

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Coutts VS Nigel Farage

Site Map