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This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum.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 9 of 48 < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 >

Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Stoke sub normal 25 Jul 23 1.17am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle So what? They were internal documents used during a review process. Whatever the basis was for them to reach their decision is a matter for them alone. The reasons for believing that something will impact their reputation and, as a consequence, the bottom line are not the point. They aren't closing the account because of Farage's opinions themselves. They are closing it on their opinion of what they do to their reputation. If "their opinion, their view" had been that his opinions enhanced their reputation they would not have closed it. On a personal level, some may agree with him, who knows? So, they closed his account because of his opinions. Why do you feel the need to argue that it's about their reputation? Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Tim Gypsy Hill '64

Stoke sub normal 25 Jul 23 1.17am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

So what? They were internal documents used during a review process.

Whatever the basis was for them to reach their decision is a matter for them alone. The reasons for believing that something will impact their reputation and, as a consequence, the bottom line are not the point. They aren't closing the account because of Farage's opinions themselves. They are closing it on their opinion of what they do to their reputation.

If "their opinion, their view" had been that his opinions enhanced their reputation they would not have closed it. On a personal level, some may agree with him, who knows?

So, they closed his account because of his opinions. Why do you feel the need to argue that it's about their reputation?

Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

NEILLO Shoreham-by-Sea 25 Jul 23 7.56am
[quote=Tim Gypsy Hill '64;3811037] So, they closed his account because of his opinions. Why do you feel the need to argue that it's about their reputation? Although I fundamentally disagree with Wisbech on this, I do get his point regarding reputation. When banks reassess their clients they put them through a risk rating process. I actually tested the RBS tool for this process albeit a decade or so ago. NF would ( should ) have been classified as a ‘ PEP ‘ - a Politically Exposed Person . And would therefore be in a higher risk category than the ordinary man on the street. Saying that, Coutts would be home to many such PEPS . When a bank onboards a PEP they perform enhanced due diligence on them and also review the risk on a more frequent basis. It appears that NF may have fallen foul of how Coutts assess their Reputational Risk. My argument is around the fact that NF’s views and political stance has been known for years - so why the change now ? I’m minded to say because the RBS Group’s reputation as a whole has been trashed down the years and now they want to be seen to be diverse, inclusive etc - hence Alison Rose appointed as CEO - just my view or though I can tell you it’s shared by some in the City. But in preserving their precious reputation, Coutts have forgotten that this country still promotes freedom of speech and a right to express your views. They are effectively censoring an individual. How they have gone about it is complete Amateur Hour and arguably their reputation has taken more of a hit than just keeping NF as a client. Apologies for the long post Old, Ungifted and White

NEILLO

Shoreham-by-Sea 25 Jul 23 7.56am

[quote=Tim Gypsy Hill '64;3811037]

So, they closed his account because of his opinions. Why do you feel the need to argue that it's about their reputation?

Although I fundamentally disagree with Wisbech on this, I do get his point regarding reputation.

When banks reassess their clients they put them through a risk rating process. I actually tested the RBS tool for this process albeit a decade or so ago. NF would ( should ) have been classified as a ‘ PEP ‘ - a Politically Exposed Person . And would therefore be in a higher risk category than the ordinary man on the street. Saying that, Coutts would be home to many such PEPS .

When a bank onboards a PEP they perform enhanced due diligence on them and also review the risk on a more frequent basis. It appears that NF may have fallen foul of how Coutts assess their Reputational Risk.

My argument is around the fact that NF’s views and political stance has been known for years - so why the change now ? I’m minded to say because the RBS Group’s reputation as a whole has been trashed down the years and now they want to be seen to be diverse, inclusive etc - hence Alison Rose appointed as CEO - just my view or though I can tell you it’s shared by some in the City.

But in preserving their precious reputation, Coutts have forgotten that this country still promotes freedom of speech and a right to express your views. They are effectively censoring an individual.

How they have gone about it is complete Amateur Hour and arguably their reputation has taken more of a hit than just keeping NF as a client.

Apologies for the long post

Old, Ungifted and White

Badger11 Beckenham 25 Jul 23 8.33am
Originally posted by NEILLO Although I fundamentally disagree with Wisbech on this, I do get his point regarding reputation. When banks reassess their clients they put them through a risk rating process. I actually tested the RBS tool for this process albeit a decade or so ago. NF would ( should ) have been classified as a ‘ PEP ‘ - a Politically Exposed Person . And would therefore be in a higher risk category than the ordinary man on the street. Saying that, Coutts would be home to many such PEPS . When a bank onboards a PEP they perform enhanced due diligence on them and also review the risk on a more frequent basis. It appears that NF may have fallen foul of how Coutts assess their Reputational Risk. My argument is around the fact that NF’s views and political stance has been known for years - so why the change now ? I’m minded to say because the RBS Group’s reputation as a whole has been trashed down the years and now they want to be seen to be diverse, inclusive etc - hence Alison Rose appointed as CEO - just my view or though I can tell you it’s shared by some in the City. But in preserving their precious reputation, Coutts have forgotten that this country still promotes freedom of speech and a right to express your views. They are effectively censoring an individual. How they have gone about it is complete Amateur Hour and arguably their reputation has taken more of a hit than just keeping NF as a client. Apologies for the long post As others have pointed out I would love to see a list of Coutts clients I bet it include some very dodgy characters. One more point

Badger11

Beckenham 25 Jul 23 8.33am

Originally posted by NEILLO

Although I fundamentally disagree with Wisbech on this, I do get his point regarding reputation.

But in preserving their precious reputation, Coutts have forgotten that this country still promotes freedom of speech and a right to express your views. They are effectively censoring an individual.

How they have gone about it is complete Amateur Hour and arguably their reputation has taken more of a hit than just keeping NF as a client.

Apologies for the long post

As others have pointed out I would love to see a list of Coutts clients I bet it include some very dodgy characters.

One more point

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 25 Jul 23 10.00am
Originally posted by HKOwen It has everything to do with your double standards depending on the subject. You have stated often that it is clear Trump is guilty etc You can use selective memory as much as you want and many on here would expect no less That I believe Trump to clearly be a despicable man unfit for public office and guilty of many things, whilst others don’t, is irrelevant to having all the evidence tested in court. That’s the only place where all of it can be examined, questioned and valued. That I believe Biden to be bombarded by allegations but not by any actual charges is just the same. If evidence, rather than innuendo, exists, let it be presented and tested. I would no more defend him, if found guilty, than I would Trump. 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 25 Jul 23 10.00am

Originally posted by HKOwen

It has everything to do with your double standards depending on the subject.

You have stated often that it is clear Trump is guilty etc

You can use selective memory as much as you want and many on here would expect no less

That I believe Trump to clearly be a despicable man unfit for public office and guilty of many things, whilst others don’t, is irrelevant to having all the evidence tested in court. That’s the only place where all of it can be examined, questioned and valued.

That I believe Biden to be bombarded by allegations but not by any actual charges is just the same. If evidence, rather than innuendo, exists, let it be presented and tested. I would no more defend him, if found guilty, than I would Trump.

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 25 Jul 23 10.14am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle That I believe Trump to clearly be a despicable man unfit for public office and guilty of many things, whilst others don’t, is irrelevant to having all the evidence tested in court. That’s the only place where all of it can be examined, questioned and valued. That I believe Biden to be bombarded by allegations but not by any actual charges is just the same. If evidence, rather than innuendo, exists, let it be presented and tested. I would no more defend him, if found guilty, than I would Trump. Only we all know that you would.

georgenorman

25 Jul 23 10.14am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That I believe Biden to be bombarded by allegations but not by any actual charges is just the same. If evidence, rather than innuendo, exists, let it be presented and tested. I would no more defend him, if found guilty, than I would Trump.

Only we all know that you would.

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 25 Jul 23 10.18am
Originally posted by HKOwen JHFC, the docs don't mention the views of their customers as you asserted in the decision making process. No point in telling someone who is stupid they are stupid etc Of course they don’t. That’s a ridiculous idea which shows how poor a grasp of this you have. They are reflecting upon the impact of perceived opinions. The mistake was to write it down in any meeting minutes or internal reports. By all means have a lively, open, internal discussion about what a t*** Farage is and how him holding an account could damage their reputation, but use diplomatic language for anything in writing. There was no need to be specific. Just “a review of Mr Farage’s reputation concluded that for us to continue offering him account services was against Company policy” 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 25 Jul 23 10.18am

Originally posted by HKOwen

JHFC, the docs don't mention the views of their customers as you asserted in the decision making process.

No point in telling someone who is stupid they are stupid etc

Of course they don’t. That’s a ridiculous idea which shows how poor a grasp of this you have. They are reflecting upon the impact of perceived opinions. The mistake was to write it down in any meeting minutes or internal reports. By all means have a lively, open, internal discussion about what a t*** Farage is and how him holding an account could damage their reputation, but use diplomatic language for anything in writing. There was no need to be specific. Just “a review of Mr Farage’s reputation concluded that for us to continue offering him account services was against Company policy”

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 25 Jul 23 10.23am
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle And the fact they rehired someone who falsified documents to further his own career is proof of their outstanding credentials. They can't fail can they? Once again I don’t think you have read the story you referenced. The internal enquiry about that rehire was scathing. It won’t happen again. 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 25 Jul 23 10.23am

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

And the fact they rehired someone who falsified documents to further his own career is proof of their outstanding credentials. They can't fail can they?

Once again I don’t think you have read the story you referenced.

The internal enquiry about that rehire was scathing. It won’t happen again.

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 25 Jul 23 10.40am
Originally posted by NEILLO Although I fundamentally disagree with Wisbech on this, I do get his point regarding reputation. When banks reassess their clients they put them through a risk rating process. I actually tested the RBS tool for this process albeit a decade or so ago. NF would ( should ) have been classified as a ‘ PEP ‘ - a Politically Exposed Person . And would therefore be in a higher risk category than the ordinary man on the street. Saying that, Coutts would be home to many such PEPS . When a bank onboards a PEP they perform enhanced due diligence on them and also review the risk on a more frequent basis. It appears that NF may have fallen foul of how Coutts assess their Reputational Risk. My argument is around the fact that NF’s views and political stance has been known for years - so why the change now ? I’m minded to say because the RBS Group’s reputation as a whole has been trashed down the years and now they want to be seen to be diverse, inclusive etc - hence Alison Rose appointed as CEO - just my view or though I can tell you it’s shared by some in the City. But in preserving their precious reputation, Coutts have forgotten that this country still promotes freedom of speech and a right to express your views. They are effectively censoring an individual. How they have gone about it is complete Amateur Hour and arguably their reputation has taken more of a hit than just keeping NF as a client. Apologies for the long post Thanks. All makes sense. I don’t though agree that Coutts are censoring Farage in any way at all. He doesn’t speak via his bank account and until this blew up no one knew he had one with Coutts. In fact their actions have provided him with a huge amount of publicity and opportunities to present himself as a victim. If this had not hit the headlines his ability to freely express himself would not have changed 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 25 Jul 23 10.40am

Originally posted by NEILLO

Although I fundamentally disagree with Wisbech on this, I do get his point regarding reputation.

But in preserving their precious reputation, Coutts have forgotten that this country still promotes freedom of speech and a right to express your views. They are effectively censoring an individual.

How they have gone about it is complete Amateur Hour and arguably their reputation has taken more of a hit than just keeping NF as a client.

Apologies for the long post

Thanks. All makes sense. I don’t though agree that Coutts are censoring Farage in any way at all. He doesn’t speak via his bank account and until this blew up no one knew he had one with Coutts. In fact their actions have provided him with a huge amount of publicity and opportunities to present himself as a victim. If this had not hit the headlines his ability to freely express himself would not have changed 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.

NEILLO Shoreham-by-Sea 25 Jul 23 11.15am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Thanks. All makes sense. I don’t though agree that Coutts are censoring Farage in any way at all. He doesn’t speak via his bank account and until this blew up no one knew he had one with Coutts. In fact their actions have provided him with a huge amount of publicity and opportunities to present himself as a victim. If this had not hit the headlines his ability to freely express himself would not have changed at all. I should have said “ censure “ - would have been clearer ! Old, Ungifted and White

NEILLO

Shoreham-by-Sea 25 Jul 23 11.15am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I should have said “ censure “ - would have been clearer !

Old, Ungifted and White

cryrst The garden of England 25 Jul 23 11.22am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Thanks. All makes sense. I don’t though agree that Coutts are censoring Farage in any way at all. He doesn’t speak via his bank account and until this blew up no one knew he had one with Coutts. In fact their actions have provided him with a huge amount of publicity and opportunities to present himself as a victim. If this had not hit the headlines his ability to freely express himself would not have changed at all. Isnt actually available for all though is it!

cryrst

The garden of England 25 Jul 23 11.22am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Isnt actually available for all though is it!

palace99 New Mills 25 Jul 23 11.50am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Thanks. All makes sense. I don’t though agree that Coutts are censoring Farage in any way at all. He doesn’t speak via his bank account and until this blew up no one knew he had one with Coutts. In fact their actions have provided him with a huge amount of publicity and opportunities to present himself as a victim. If this had not hit the headlines his ability to freely express himself would not have changed at all. Can't believe this is still a story and has made front page news. Originally i thought the spin was that 'man of the people' Farage had a Coutts account, something 99% plus of the population are unable to obtain. If this is a freedom of speech argument then surely every organisation can refuse business if they choose to do so. This happens every day e.g. a restaurant turning customers way if they 'look' dodgy or a pub barring outspoken customers etc. Didn't a publican throw Starmer out of his pub a year or so ago telling him he wasn't welcome? Where were the freedom of speech brigade then?

palace99

New Mills 25 Jul 23 11.50am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Can't believe this is still a story and has made front page news.

Originally i thought the spin was that 'man of the people' Farage had a Coutts account, something 99% plus of the population are unable to obtain.

If this is a freedom of speech argument then surely every organisation can refuse business if they choose to do so.

This happens every day e.g. a restaurant turning customers way if they 'look' dodgy or a pub barring outspoken customers etc.

Didn't a publican throw Starmer out of his pub a year or so ago telling him he wasn't welcome? Where were the freedom of speech brigade then?

Teddy Eagle 25 Jul 23 12.25pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Once again I don’t think you have read the story you referenced. The internal enquiry about that rehire was scathing. It won’t happen again. Contrition is all very well but the point is it happened. Obviously Bashir falsifying evidence and forging documents was a complete one-off and has never happened before or since at the BBC.

Teddy Eagle

25 Jul 23 12.25pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Once again I don’t think you have read the story you referenced.

The internal enquiry about that rehire was scathing. It won’t happen again.

Contrition is all very well but the point is it happened.
Obviously Bashir falsifying evidence and forging documents was a complete one-off and has never happened before or since at the BBC.

ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 25 Jul 23 12.32pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle Contrition is all very well but the point is it happened. Obviously Bashir falsifying evidence and forging documents was a complete one-off and has never happened before or since at the BBC. It wasn't the BBC'S fault. They're not institutionally corrupt - just rogue individuals. However, the Met Police, Yorkshire Cricket Club, Cricket in general and, indeed, much of European society are Institutionally racist. Which is far more serious than making stuff up to get a bigger audience, which as you say, only happened the once and can never happen again. Copper-fastened, BBC gold-standard guarantee. BBC are not institutionally to blame for anything. They're a British institution in the true, nicer sense of the word. Unimpeachable. Red and Blue Army!

ASCPFC

Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 25 Jul 23 12.32pm

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Contrition is all very well but the point is it happened.
Obviously Bashir falsifying evidence and forging documents was a complete one-off and has never happened before or since at the BBC.

It wasn't the BBC'S fault. They're not institutionally corrupt - just rogue individuals. However, the Met Police, Yorkshire Cricket Club, Cricket in general and, indeed, much of European society are Institutionally racist. Which is far more serious than making stuff up to get a bigger audience, which as you say, only happened the once and can never happen again. Copper-fastened, BBC gold-standard guarantee. BBC are not institutionally to blame for anything. They're a British institution in the true, nicer sense of the word. Unimpeachable.

Red and Blue Army!

eagleman13 On The Road To Hell & Alicante 25 Jul 23 12.34pm
Just thought i'd post this, its the bbc apology to NF . . . [Link] This operation, will make the 'Charge Of The Light Brigade' seem like a simple military exercise.

eagleman13

On The Road To Hell & Alicante 25 Jul 23 12.34pm

Just thought i'd post this, its the bbc apology to NF . . . [Link]

This operation, will make the 'Charge Of The Light Brigade' seem like a simple military exercise.

Teddy Eagle 25 Jul 23 12.39pm
Originally posted by ASCPFC It wasn't the BBC'S fault. They're not institutionally corrupt - just rogue individuals. However, the Met Police, Yorkshire Cricket Club, Cricket in general and, indeed, much of European society are Institutionally racist. Which is far more serious than making stuff up to get a bigger audience, which as you say, only happened the once and can never happen again. Copper-fastened, BBC gold-standard guarantee. BBC are not institutionally to blame for anything. They're a British institution in the true, nicer sense of the word. Unimpeachable. And Coutts is similarly above reproach. This is from The Guardian. Its more controversial customers have included the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and the mafia leader Emilio Di Giovine, and it has hosted accounts allegedly linked to a vast Russian money-laundering operation.

Teddy Eagle

25 Jul 23 12.39pm

Originally posted by ASCPFC

And Coutts is similarly above reproach.

This is from The Guardian.

Its more controversial customers have included the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and the mafia leader Emilio Di Giovine, and it has hosted accounts allegedly linked to a vast Russian money-laundering operation.

Teddy Eagle 25 Jul 23 12.43pm
Originally posted by palace99 Can't believe this is still a story and has made front page news. Originally i thought the spin was that 'man of the people' Farage had a Coutts account, something 99% plus of the population are unable to obtain. If this is a freedom of speech argument then surely every organisation can refuse business if they choose to do so. This happens every day e.g. a restaurant turning customers way if they 'look' dodgy or a pub barring outspoken customers etc. Didn't a publican throw Starmer out of his pub a year or so ago telling him he wasn't welcome? Where were the freedom of speech brigade then? Probably more of a story had he been refused service by a rabid UKIP voter rather than a life-long Labour supporter who felt let down by the party.

Teddy Eagle

25 Jul 23 12.43pm

Originally posted by palace99

Can't believe this is still a story and has made front page news.

Originally i thought the spin was that 'man of the people' Farage had a Coutts account, something 99% plus of the population are unable to obtain.

If this is a freedom of speech argument then surely every organisation can refuse business if they choose to do so.

This happens every day e.g. a restaurant turning customers way if they 'look' dodgy or a pub barring outspoken customers etc.

Didn't a publican throw Starmer out of his pub a year or so ago telling him he wasn't welcome? Where were the freedom of speech brigade then?

Probably more of a story had he been refused service by a rabid UKIP voter rather than a life-long Labour supporter who felt let down by the party.

ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 25 Jul 23 5.12pm
Just hearing they were fed up with having to count his change jar. Red and Blue Army!

ASCPFC

Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 25 Jul 23 5.12pm

Just hearing they were fed up with having to count his change jar.

Red and Blue Army!

georgenorman 25 Jul 23 5.18pm
Originally posted by eagleman13 Just thought i'd post this, its the bbc apology to NF . . . [Link] Here's Nat West's climb down to Palace fan, Nigel Farage. Edited by georgenorman (25 Jul 2023 5.23pm) Attachment: Natwest-apology.webp (117.31Kb)

georgenorman

25 Jul 23 5.18pm

Originally posted by eagleman13

Just thought i'd post this, its the bbc apology to NF . . . [Link]

Here's Nat West's climb down to Palace fan, Nigel Farage.

Edited by georgenorman (25 Jul 2023 5.23pm)

Attachment: Natwest-apology.webp (117.31Kb)

cryrst The garden of England 25 Jul 23 5.43pm
Originally posted by georgenorman Here's Nat West's climb down to Palace fan, Nigel Farage. Edited by georgenorman (25 Jul 2023 5.23pm) So it is up to hmg to set the new rules. What a cop out.

cryrst

The garden of England 25 Jul 23 5.43pm

Originally posted by georgenorman

Here's Nat West's climb down to Palace fan, Nigel Farage.

Edited by georgenorman (25 Jul 2023 5.23pm)

So it is up to hmg to set the new rules. What a cop out.

georgenorman 25 Jul 23 6.37pm
The latest from Alison Rose. How can she possibly remain in her position having divulged details about a customer to a newspaper. If she has an account with Coutts or Nat West, the least she should do is close down her own account as she is damaging to the reputation of the bank. Edited by georgenorman (25 Jul 2023 6.40pm) Attachment: Rose.JPG (153.41Kb)

georgenorman

25 Jul 23 6.37pm

The latest from Alison Rose. How can she possibly remain in her position having divulged details about a customer to a newspaper.

If she has an account with Coutts or Nat West, the least she should do is close down her own account as she is damaging to the reputation of the bank.

Edited by georgenorman (25 Jul 2023 6.40pm)

Attachment: Rose.JPG (153.41Kb)

Page 9 of 48 < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 >

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Coutts VS Nigel Farage

Site Map