New legislation looking to stop banks closing bank accounts on customers political views

Status
Not open for further replies.
Amity Island

Amity Island

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 1
Ministers have ordered officials to start drafting legislation to give banks new free speech duties after it emerged that Coutts bank had closed Nigel Farage’s accounts because his views did not “align” with its “values”.


Andrew Griffith, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, has asked civil servants to explore adding free speech protections to banking licences, according to Whitehall sources.

www.telegraph.co.uk

Banks could lose their licence if they discriminate against customers over political views

Legislation is being drafted to give banks new free speech duties after the Coutts scandal
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
 
Thing is most backs wouldn't have a scooby do what customers views are on politics or otherwise, Nigel has aligned with some dodgy characters like Trump & is very outspoken on all subjects, in fact he's a pain in the arse.
 
Good to know that ministers are getting on with the really, really important stuff, the sort of thing that will make a real difference to the lives of everyday working people.

I can just see the pitch to the banks... keep Nigel and the other swivel eyed loons happy and you can charge the plebs whatever you like for their mortgages and make even bigger profits. Win all round for 5% of the population.

PS... Thats me as an ageing socialist and not as a moderator.
 
If you’re an ageing socialist @Docb maybe the capitalist banks won’t like that one day? It might not align with their capitalist principles.

I’m very far from a fan of Farage but the idea that anybody can be punished for Wrongthink is worrying.
 
Inka said:
I’m very far from a fan of Farage but the idea that anybody can be punished for Wrongthink is worrying.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem to be what happened in his case. He was heading towards not qualifying for the bank account that he had, so they had an obvious choice about whether they let the requirements slide or not and they decided they didn't want to be charitable.

It's obviously bad if someone (because of their views or otherwise) can't get a bank account, but if there's a bank account you don't qualify for I think I'm OK with a bank also looking at other factors (where allowed by the law) when deciding whether to fully apply the qualifications or not. That feels like the kind of thing that private companies can (and should be allowed) to do.
 
The thing is that nobody will ever know is what really happened. All we have is two PR companies shouting about their clients version of events. Most newspapers need to be included under the heading of PR companies in this context.

A plague on all their houses I say and particularly on Farage who's beer drinking, fag smoking, man of the people image does not reconcile easily with the idea of having a Coutts account designed to make very wealthy people (which he is) even wealthier whilst making everybody else poorer.

PS.. again, that's me as me, not as a moderator.
 
Docb said:
The thing is that nobody will ever know is what really happened.
Click to expand...
True, though we do have this 40 page dossier from Coutts which looks to me to be plausible (the kind of thing I'd expect an organisation to produce) and consistent with their actions. Since it was intended to be an internal document I'm inclined to believe it. And from that it looks like they felt Farage's accounts hadn't met the commercial criteria for a while so they'd decided to have him leave once his mortgage had been paid, and they also felt some other things (his possible links with Russia, the possibility of reentering politics, controversial statements of various kinds that they felt didn't fit with the bank), so were comfortable bringing the exit forward when he paid off the mortgage early. They also recognised the possibility of negative press caused by this exit.

I have no connection with either Farage or this bank (or banks in general), but I think I believe the bank and think that what the bank did is basically fine. (The "basically" is just that if it's true that they didn't offer him a NatWest account at the same time as they told him he had to leave Coutts, that seems a bit off. I think everyone should have access to a bank account, even Nigel Farage.)
 
Hats off to you @Bruce Stephens - looked behind the headlines and taken a balanced view. If only the media would do that!
 
Inka said:
And now the head of Nat West has resigned:
Click to expand...
She had to. The CEO of a bank can't talk about one of their account holders with anyone, let alone a journalist.
 
I am ore upset that as over four decades as a loyal Barclays' customer they removed my overdraft facility. Speaking to the monkey as banks don't have organ grinders (managers) any more my income now precludes me from this facility. I felt both people I spoke to pretty disrespectful! As a pensioner you start becoming invisible. And, yet, I have always managed my finances well. The plonker even suggested lowering my Barclaycard limit one month after they raised it without me asking! :(
 
MikeyBikey said:
I am ore upset that as over four decades as a loyal Barclays' customer they removed my overdraft facility. Speaking to the monkey as banks don't have organ grinders (managers) any more my income now precludes me from this facility. I felt both people I spoke to pretty disrespectful! As a pensioner you start becoming invisible. And, yet, I have always managed my finances well. The plonker even suggested lowering my Barclaycard limit one month after they raised it without me asking! :(
Click to expand...
Sorry to hear that, Mikey, especially with everything else you have to cope with. I'm with HSBC, having opened an account with the Midland Bank (it was the nearest bank to where I lived, which was as good a reason to choose them as any) when I started work, 56 years ago. I have to say that in all that time I've never had any issues, even when I was running a big overdraft in the years after my 1982 divorce.

At the end of last year I went into our local branch (we still have one..!!) and asked to close my 1-Year Fixed Rate Saver as with interest rates starting to rise I didn't think the 1% rate was value for money anymore. The member of staff I dealt with was very friendly and courteous and agreed with me...!
 
Last edited:
When we moved to Isle of Mull I found we needed a loan from NatWest, £20,000. This was for updating our cottage, and refitting the interior. When we moved back to the Ribble Valley I found we could pay off the loan early, so phoned NatWest to arrange it.

Well, they were happy to accept the payment - but added another £1000 for arranging it. I immediately argued that that was a ludicrous charge, made a punishment for depriving them of four years interest. It certainly wasn't for the cost of pressing a few buttons. I went on the spiel of saying I had been a customer of NatWest since I was 17... with Mortgages and Investments, and that is no way to to charge me for paying off a loan. The guy I was talking to said that he would speak to his manager.

A few minutes later, he told me that they're waiving the charge - in other words, they had accepted my argument. I'm still a NatWest customer.

Nothing like haggling with these companies - I've used haggling with Broadband , and with Vodafone, getting £30 off my monthly bill. It's great fun - it's my hobby :rofl:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top