Time for a PEP talk

[CXRAndy]

So if I have no money, a terrible history of debt and financial fraud I can go to any bank and demand to open an account with them

You would likely subject to further scrutiny and added management fees.

 

[Rusty Nails]

You would likely subject to further scrutiny and added management fees.

I doubt that very much (if I have no or little money how can I pay any added management fees). In this scenario these are conditions that I could not meet and which would disqualify me from membership. I would not have an absolute right to an account because...conditions.

 

[BoldonLad]

In this digital age, it should be an absolute right. Obviously safeguards need to be in place, revoking an account should be done openly and not arbitrarily by the bank, a court should make the decision after hearing the evidence

While I would agree that provision should be made (and, in my experience is made) for everyone to have a basic bank account, I don't personally think that means every individual should be eligible to have every type of bank account they wish.

Each individual bank typically has numerous account types, with various terms and conditions (eg minimum monthly deposits, minimum balance, overdraft rights, number of withdrawal in a period, etc, etc). Farage had such an account, he failed to adhere to the terms and conditions, bank exercised their right to close the account. No story here.

 

[Bromptonaut]

While I would agree that provision should be made (and, in my experience is made) for everyone to have a basic bank account, I don't personally think that means every individual should be eligible to have every type of bank account they wish.

That. Exactly.

There needs to be a right to a basic account to receive income and so that outgoings can be paid by DD or card.

Anything else, whether it's a card/chequebook with a prestigious brand (like Coutts) or overdraft, credit cards and all the rest is subject to status.

 

[Bromptonaut]

But there are many many people who have been rejected banking services at multiple banks. So this would pretty much confirm their stories and N Farage

If N Farage had fallen below the threshold, there is no reason not to inform him of this. Like others have reported, banks blankly refuse to explain why they're being kicked out.

Like I've said this is a very dangerous , life crippling action , which banks must not be allowed to carry on with.

Everyone should be able to hold a bank account, it can only be revoked by evidence of serious wrong doing and actioned in court.

Today is almost entirely digital age,

Banking services should be a right

The banks are subject to onerous obligations regarding money laundering, proceeds of crime etc etc. They're obliged to go through processes to ensure they 'know their customer'. If a customer fails those tests it's not that they choose not to tell folks why their account has been closed; they're forbidden from doing so.

IIRC these obligations are retained EU law. Government could revoke or modify the legislation but it's their action and not those of the banks.

 

[Pale Rider]

The banks are subject to onerous obligations regarding money laundering, proceeds of crime etc etc. They're obliged to go through processes to ensure they 'know their customer'. If a customer fails those tests it's not that they choose not to tell folks why their account has been closed; they're forbidden from doing so.

IIRC these obligations are retained EU law. Government could revoke or modify the legislation but it's their action and not those of the banks.

I think that's spot on.

But the single issue campaigners I highlighted in the OP are little people like the rest of us.

Hard to see how they present any greater risk then any other citizen who is content not to actively campaign about anything.

Perhaps lots of ordinary people are being denied accounts as well, although I think we may have heard a whisper or two after Farage brought the issue to prominence.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Posts on this thread keep referring to ordinary people who are campaigners for some issue or another having their accounts closed.

Apart from the vicar with the Yorkshire Building Society are there any other examples where people have gone public over this sort of thing.

I don't mean people in the public eye; I mean ordinary Joes.

 

[newfhouse]

Are the people complaining that banks are choosing who they want as customers the same ones that think that cake shops should be allowed to discriminate against LGBT clients? I think some of them may be.

 

[Pale Rider]

Posts on this thread keep referring to ordinary people who are campaigners for some issue or another having their accounts closed.

Apart from the vicar with the Yorkshire Building Society are there any other examples where people have gone public over this sort of thing.

I don't mean people in the public eye; I mean ordinary Joes.

There was an older bloke on Sky News who appeared very ordinary, apart from his campaigning.

He said Metro Bank had refused him a business account.

If it makes any difference, he is a gender campaigner who is on what we might call the traditional side of that fence.

 

[the snail]

Why don't you do an experiment. Write into your bank, query their woke credentials (obviously it's tongue in arse)

See what happens to you. Publish all the correspondence to verify the situation

Yeah, coz banks are famously woke marxist organisations. I think questions were raised about the source of Farages finances, links with russia, but it turns out he just wasn't rich enough. He'll just have to grift a bit harder won't he?

 

[Bromptonaut]

There was an older bloke on Sky News who appeared very ordinary, apart from his campaigning.

He said Metro Bank had refused him a business account.

If it makes any difference, he is a gender campaigner who is on what we might call the traditional side of that fence.

The account was, according to Sky News, declined because Metro Bank don't offer accounts to campaign groups of the type this gentleman was proposing. It's letter to the prospective customer said:

"Our policy doesn't currently allow organisations to receive donations if not a registered charity, and for community groups to be linked to, or influence political policies or legislations,"

I'm not saying that no UK bank has ever closed an account for reasons that look shaky when exposed to publicity; they make cock ups or have hard cases/hard facts that are borderline. What I'm not seeing is lots of people of whatever campaigning position being locked out of access to the banking system

 

[icowden]

I ruled Farage out of the equation partly because he's such a divisive figure.
But I agree his case does seem genuinely murky.

Why? He was offered a standard Natwest account by Coutts and turned it down. He wants a swanky bank and is throwing his toys out of the pram because they don't want him any more.

 

[Pale Rider]

Why? He was offered a standard Natwest account by Coutts and turned it down. He wants a swanky bank and is throwing his toys out of the pram because they don't want him any more.

His account (ho-ho) is that he was only offered the Nat West account after he publicised his case.

It seems odd there should be any dispute here.

Surely it should be routine for Coutts to politely offer to transfer any account which has fallen below the wealth bar to their owners NatWest.

It then emerges this might have something to do with the shady concept of the Politically Exposed Person, although Farage freely admits he currently doesn't have the money for a Coutts account.

If you thinks that's all straightforward, great, but to me it's the very definition of a murky tale.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Part of the reason it seems murky because we've only got Farage's side of the story. While he likes to present himself as a 'Hale Fellow Well Met' character he actually very thin skinned when subject to proper questioning - see his performance at the Referendum and various election TV specials.

The bank, for obvious reasons, isn't going to put somebody forward to to the morning news round to spell out their account (ho ho again!!). There have though been industry spokespeople explaining the generality of why and when a bank might tell a customer to, in the nicest possible way, sod off.

 

[icowden]

His account (ho-ho) is that he was only offered the Nat West account after he publicised his case.
It seems odd there should be any dispute here.

Well it's not beyond the bounds of reason.

"Mr Farage? Yes, ah good. I am calling as your account is falling well below our wealth threshold and I am afraid that unfortunately we will have to withdraw the facility. When you are able to set up a new account and have transferred your remaining funds, we will close it for you".

Some time later

"Mr Farage? Yes, Coutts again I'm afraid. I understand that there has been no progress in setting up a new account. I can offer to contact our owners, Natwest and set up an account for you there, if that would help - but we really do need to close this account. You have been aware for some time that you are not meeting out account criteria..."

Surely it should be routine for Coutts to politely offer to transfer any account which has fallen below the wealth bar to their owners NatWest.

It probably is. I suspect that they might let the account holder make their own arrangments first - as above.

It then emerges this might have something to do with the shady concept of the Politically Exposed Person, although Farage freely admits he currently doesn't have the money for a Coutts account.

No, it then emerges that Farage claims this is a conspiracy theory because Farage. He then makes claims all over social media and gets anyone still talking to him and in politics to stick their oar in.