Nigel Farage

[Eebo]

To be honest I am not sure what point you are making.
He was denied the opportunity to continue with what he already had and wanted to keep partially based on political reasons.
So what is the relevance of being offered a bog standard current account with Nat West when he may well already have had a similar current account with another bank.
I don’t think anyone has suggested , including me that he was left without any bank
My understanding is there is to be an enquiry in to how far up the command chain within Nat West Group the decision was made.
If Alison Rose CEO of the Group made the ultimate decision there is talk it may cost her her job.
We just need to wait and see what unfolds
If I am mis understanding your post please elaborate, don’t just repeat what you have already said.

Who cares? The frog faced xenophobic racist is paying a very small price for his behaviour, the rest of us are all paying for it too in higher inflation and lower growth.

 

[halfmist]

But they are only saying what every sane person thinks about him so what is the story?

Fine, but what happens with the next person beliefs whether they are on the left or right.
Who gets to play judge and jury.
Apparently there are 3 other finance companies under review .
Wait to see if one of the cases is Mr Corbin, now that would be me batting on the same side as the lefties, that would confuse them

 

[halfmist]

Who cares? The frog faced xenophobic racist is paying a very small price for his behaviour, the rest of us are all paying for it too in higher inflation and lower growth.

And today is Monday in both cases no link with Farage

 

[halfmist]

In any of the statements, was there mention of payments into the account from ‘despot’ sources?

There is a can of worms there for all politicians and where they are funded from.
You try getting 1/2 a million quid for someone to “keep” your diary for you.

 

[Chris in London]

Well it’s actually a public company, not a private one and in addition the tax payer still has a massive stake in its parent company.
Not sure who you mean by “they” when making the decision to bar someone, the decision will be down to a he or she making a subjective decision,no doubt swayed by their own personal opinion.
Leaving Farage out of the discussion as he is a bit of a side show to an important principle and that’s why it has had so much media coverage.
There is a very important principle at stake , I would not be very comfortable about an individual deciding whether I could have something or not based on whether they agreed with my political beliefs, colour of skin sexual orientation etc etc
If the Bank thought it was acting correctly why did it need to tell lies as to the reason for closing his account.
Oh and before anyone comes on and says it’s because he did not meet their economic criteria I know of at least 3 people who have an account with them that don't meet it either.
Not interested in getting in to an argument with the usual crew about Farage,I already know your opinions of him.
My post is about whether someone should be allowed within the Bank, to become Judge and Jury and if so,they should at least be required to real reasons why they are doing something.

Remember this?

You obviously don’t know the difference between a public and a private company and there is little point in telling you the difference

or this?

Oh dear oh dear, they do say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and you are definitely living proof of this.
Coutts is a 100% wholly owned subsidiary of Nat West Group PLC. But you obviously don’t understand the workings of Group Accounts.
Just stick to what you’re good at, giving thumbs up.

What about this one?

But it’s not about Farage is it.
Let me spell it out, if you were refused an Account on the Basis of your political beliefs you would be on here jumping up and down saying the nasty Tories are now trying to get rid of Democracy

And finally this one?

Since you pretend not to understand what point I’m making, I will spell it out for you.

There you were, as patronising and condescending as Mcfc1632 ever was, explaining why Coutts is just one part of the larger NatWest group and not a separate entity in its own right.

But then in your rush to leave Oldham behind you jumped to Farage’s defence by saying he had been denied an account on the basis of his political beliefs. But the only way that can be right (because he was offered a Nat West account) is if Coutts and Nat West are in fact separate entities, which is precisely the opposite of what you’ve been bloviating.

So you were either wrong when you said they were part of the same group, or you were wrong when you said Farage had been denied an account, because he’d been offered a replacement account within the same group.

All I asked was which one was wrong.

But we both know you aren’t going to admit you contradicted yourself because that’s not how you roll, is it?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Wasn't his first whine that he'd had his account closed but hadn't been given a reason?
Simon Jack of the BBC was at some point pointed at something that led him to his own conclusion as to why.

 

[oldius]

That this private banking issue has been occupying headlines, and been the subject of endless tweets and articles by certain publications, tells you everything you need to know about the way the media manipulates the narrative. This issue is utterly inconsequential to the vast majority of the UK, and would never affect their banking arrangements, but this man has managed to bring it to mainstream attention and convince the masses of some Machiavellian plot that could affect us all, when the reality is so, so much different.

 

[halfmist]

It's a fact that Farage is an odious fascist who (give him credit) is largely responsible for one of the worst decisions this country has ever made. We're all poorer thanks to him, and unless odious fascism is a protected characteristic he's not been discriminated against. Isn't needing oodles of money to get a Coutts account discrimination against the poor?

Agreed many may agree with you regards Farage it’s a subjective opinion not a fact
The worst decision this country has ever made eh.
A little bit disrespectful for the majority who voted to leave but of course that’s discussed on another thread, by I assume the same old faces you see on here.
Money discriminates against the poor in everything in life.
Oodles of money are needed for lots of things we all crave for
Somebodies beliefs are not in my OPINION a valid reason to close their account

 

[halfmist]

Unless Coutts were merely trying to be nice. "We're cancelling your account because you're considerably less rich than we like, and not of course just because you're an odious fascist grifter."

That’s very noble of them
I think we can safely say the letter was not sent from anyone who posts on here, not enough expletives.

 

[halfmist]

That this private banking issue has been occupying headlines, and been the subject of endless tweets and articles by certain publications, tells you everything you need to know about the way the media manipulates the narrative. This issue is utterly inconsequential to the vast majority of the UK, and would never affect their banking arrangements, but this man has managed to bring it to mainstream attention and convince the masses of some Machiavellian plot that could affect us all, when the reality is so, so much different.

Agreed it’s a non event to everyone else.
But like it or lump it Human Rights is big business here.
Anyone, or organisation who threatens the principles, always leads to a big song and dance.