|
Post by jonksy on Jul 5, 2023 8:37:01 GMT
Using the full force of large institutions to crush the individual, seems to be a persistent left wing fetish. The drooling. If the reasons given for closing the account are correct, then the very right-wing Farage has 'crushed' himself. Why isn't smarmer debanked then? Just asking for a friend of course.
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 5, 2023 9:16:04 GMT
Using the full force of large institutions to crush the individual, seems to be a persistent left wing fetish. The drooling. If the reasons given for closing the account are correct, then the very right-wing Farage has 'crushed' himself. The reason can be anything. Couts don't actually close peoples accounts for drifting under 1 million as a matter of policy - such a policy would be unworkable and there is no reason to do so. Most of this is nonsense. You don't close the accounts of major political figures accidentally - so it was purposeful. Interestingly, Couts is owned by a major bank which is effectively significantly state owned.
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jul 5, 2023 9:22:42 GMT
So banks don't close accounts of individuals or business or political parties, who are taking money from people who fund criminals (just stop oil), the banks appear to have caught the double standard syndrome.
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Jul 5, 2023 9:37:27 GMT
This is how it's said to have played out (by admittedly anti-Farage sources): Coutts told Farage that they were closing his premium millionaires' account because his funds had fallen below the required amount to maintain such an account. The reason was clearly explained to Farage.
Farage then went public and said that his account was closed and that he was not told the reason. He filled the gap in his version of events with an invented reason (political reasons). Coutts offered Farage an ordinary pleb's account after Farage kicked up a stink, but that doesn't change the fact that, contrary to what he claimed, he was told the reason why his account was being closed BEFORE he went public, saying he had been given no reason. If Farage is lying it could seriously harm his reputation. I did not realise others are losing their accounts too over who they know which seems bizarre as they already have anti-money laundering measures. Is this certain corporates not wanting to deal with certain types of individuals or a business decision that as person A falls under their recognised PEP status they have to undertake more work. If the latter they could be open and state as a PEP there is an account opening charge.
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 5, 2023 9:45:16 GMT
If Farage is lying it could seriously harm his reputation. No. The gammons don't care if Farage lies. And he has no reputation to lose with everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Jul 5, 2023 10:11:04 GMT
It is interesting that this discriminatory behaviour to customers has been going on for years, Lord Nigel Lawson's grand daughter is denied an account because her grandfather was Chancellor of the Exchequer, the loud mouthed Katy Hopkins has had her banked account withdrawn and David Davis has raised this issue in the House to no avail. Farage has quite rightly decided to take the Banks on, and he is a clever bloke, look at the situation, it was being ignored until last week, now the media, the HoC , all political commentators are talking about it.
Farage is very shrewd, he picks his battles and has a track record of winning.
Those who feel that this behaviour by the Banks towards Farage is acceptable are seriously weird, this is about the rights of citizens, but of course because it is about Farage they think it is ok.
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Jul 5, 2023 10:13:37 GMT
Watch this and tell me this is acceptable,
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 5, 2023 10:15:42 GMT
It is interesting that this discriminatory behaviour to customers has been going on for years, Lord Nigel Lawson's grand daughter is denied an account because her grandfather was Chancellor of the Exchequer, the loud mouthed Katy Hopkins has had her banked account withdrawn and David Davis has raised this issue in the House to no avail. Farage has quite rightly decided to take the Banks on, and he is a clever bloke, look at the situation, it was being ignored until last week, now the media, the HoC , all political commentators are talking about it. Farage is very shrewd, he picks his battles and has a track record of winning. Those who feel that this behaviour by the Banks towards Farage is acceptable are seriously weird, this is about the rights of citizens, but of course because it is about Farage they think it is ok. Nigel Farage is a functional alcoholic who has made a career out of telling lies. His great achievement was to lie to the country before the referendum that the UK was about to become flooded with Muslims from Turkey (at a time when ISIS was carrying out a terrorist campaign in Europe). That's the entire sum of his achievements. When a member of the EU Parliament, he was a Putin enabler. He failed to gain a seat in Parliament 7 times.
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Jul 5, 2023 10:24:24 GMT
So you do think it is acceptable. I hope that it doesn't happen to you or your grandchildren.
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 5, 2023 10:26:15 GMT
So you do think it is acceptable. I hope that it doesn't happen to you or your grandchildren. Yes, I hope my premium millionaire's account never falls below the £3,000,000 minimum threshold too.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jul 5, 2023 10:53:22 GMT
How so? - how did the BBC get details of Farages financial details except leaked from Coutts. Hmmm, yes, if Coutts did in fact act unprofessionally by releasing those details, they won't have a claim. All will depend on whether Coutts released that information, and what the authority of the employee who released it was.
But even if Coutts doesn't have a libel case, the fact that Coutts did it to protect their reputation in the face of false claims made by the Manfrog will substantially reduce the Manfrog's damages. Even if he technically wins his case, he may be awarded only a nominal sum and not even be awarded his costs. That doesnt matter - if any member of Coutts is secretly leaking financial details of their customers to the BBC then the company is liable. Farage never made any false claims against Coutts - he never even said who the bank in question was. The suspicion that it was Coutts was only confirmed by the BBC.
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Jul 5, 2023 10:54:13 GMT
So you do think it is acceptable. I hope that it doesn't happen to you or your grandchildren. Yes, I hope my premium millionaire's account never falls below the £3,000,000 minimum threshold too. If it ever does we'll have a whip round darling. No one wants to see you suffer that indignity.
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Jul 5, 2023 11:33:18 GMT
Exactly, Farage is no mug, Coutts have either disclosed confidential details to the BBC, or the BBC have made it up, either way Farage has a case, as I mentioned in an earlier post, Coutts (or an employee) are bang to rights, and as the Prime Minister obviously has no interest in citizens being treated in this way then the only recourse is the Courts, but they seem to be as contaminated with woke as everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 5, 2023 12:47:11 GMT
Hmmm, yes, if Coutts did in fact act unprofessionally by releasing those details, they won't have a claim. All will depend on whether Coutts released that information, and what the authority of the employee who released it was.
But even if Coutts doesn't have a libel case, the fact that Coutts did it to protect their reputation in the face of false claims made by the Manfrog will substantially reduce the Manfrog's damages. Even if he technically wins his case, he may be awarded only a nominal sum and not even be awarded his costs. That doesnt matter - if any member of Coutts is secretly leaking financial details of their customers to the BBC then the company is liable. Farage never made any false claims against Coutts - he never even said who the bank in question was. The suspicion that it was Coutts was only confirmed by the BBC. So, Farage, a pubic figure, lied about the reasons his account was closed, and you think the courts are going to award meaningful damages against the party who exposed his lies? I hope Farage sues the bank. He's unlikely to recover anything but a nominal sum in damages, and he will be extremely lucky if he even recovers his costs. It will be ruinously expensive. Go for it, Manfrog!
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Jul 5, 2023 12:52:11 GMT
Yes, I hope my premium millionaire's account never falls below the £3,000,000 minimum threshold too. If it ever does we'll have a whip round darling. No one wants to see you suffer that indignity. Cheers, Monte. I don't want my money rubbing shoulders with the common man's.
|
|