[Politics] Dame Alison Rose resigns

[Weststander]

mortgage paid off meant he no longer qualified for an account with them.

To confirm before we develop on this, Coutts only ever have customers holding a mortgage?

 

[Chicken Run]

What annoys me more than any of the rights and wrongs of this case is that this Dulwich Collge educated, former city trader turned "everyman" who is apparently in no way part of the establishment has somehow ensured his crappy trivial case is now mainstream news. Why? Why should anyone give a f**k about Coutts binning him off? It's an absolute nothing story on a par with a specific business going under entirely because of Brexit. You know, the sort of thing that goes on but doesn't make headline news for 3 consecutive weeks.

I totally agree about not giving a f***, I’m just confused why this discussion is taking place on the main board when there is apparently a perfectly good thread already in the basement that was available?

 

[Greg Bobkin]

He did have enough money, the bank lied about that.

Really?

 

[beorhthelm]

To confirm before we develop on this, Coutts only ever have customers holding a mortgage?

no. by holding a mortgage he met some criteria.

 

[Weststander]

no. by holding a mortgage he met some criteria.

Interesting piece here in the Guardian of all places, they do retain clients with less than £3m in savings who’ve paid off their mortgage. He remained a profitable customer and was the lowest category of PEP. It boiled down to the subjective judgement of a committee on his views.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...rage-has-a-point-coutts-should-explain-itself

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I hate Farage but this is a very slippery slope for banking. Extreme example, but what if your bank manager happened to be a Palace fan and took issue with something you posted on here? Would you be fair game for account closure? If the CEO of your water company didn’t like your politics could they get you cut off?

This is a very specific case, it's a specific person and a specific bank. Had this been a High Street bank and a member of the public I might think differently, but it isnt. For these reasons I dont buy your 'where will it end' line.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

If the CEO of your water company didn’t like your politics could they get you cut off?

I'm sure my politics are very much aligned to those of my public utility providers. I have no concerns

 

[A1X]

 

[Brovion]

I completely disagree, it is up to Coutts who they want to be associated with, or without. As I say, this is nothing new as businesses are often disassociating themselves with people or entities which do not share the same values or beliefs.

As for cancel culture...who's cancelling who here? Is Coutts' basic right to choose who they allign themselves with being cancelled?

I'm sure even a few years ago the idea of someone having something as mundane as their banking facilities cancelled (or even altered) because of their legitimate political beliefs would have been unheard of. And the cynic in me thinks that Coutts, the bank of the Disgustingly Rich, have only done it to burnish their 'right on' credentials and help disguise the fact that actually they act as a repository for all sorts of ill-gotten gains.

Farage is seen as fair game as the opening post of this thread proved. And although I have no access to Coutts' customer database I'm prepared to bet my house that they have customers with no public profile who have far more obnoxious views and practices than Farage.

 

[The Clamp]

The only problem with Coutts ditching Farage out of principle is that they probably allow all sorts of horrible arseholes to bank with them.

Money talks.

Having said that, I wish they’d stuck to their guns and just said we don’t like him. He’s a racist prick , we are not doing business with him.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Why should his views not impact his custom? Many businesses drop people if they feel their views are not alligned with theirs....this is not new. There are many examples of this.

Farage's local pub banned him. Undesirable, I think they said!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I'm sure even a few years ago the idea of someone having something as mundane as their banking facilities cancelled (or even altered) because of their legitimate political beliefs would have been unheard of. And the cynic in me thinks that Coutts, the bank of the Disgustingly Rich, have only done it to burnish their 'right on' credentials and help disguise the fact that actually they act as a repository for all sorts of ill-gotten gains.

Farage is seen as fair game as the opening post of this thread proved. And although I have no access to Coutts' customer database I'm prepared to bet my house that they have customers with no public profile who have far more obnoxious views and practices than Farage.

They'll be hard put to find many with more obnoxious views, including admiring Putin, and his view of other nationalities.

 

[Acker79]

 

[The Clamp]

Hmm.

I think his point is a bit strained.

I have every sympathy for people affected by trials that get postponed, especially for such an impactful crime.

However, it’s a rather separate thing. Also as much as we all dislike Farage, this particular case has brought up the bigger issue of whether banks can arbitrarily dump customers they don’t agree with. Indeed, I think this one will see laws changed or at the very least tightened up.

It’s different to other businesses. If a financial institution black-balls an individual, that will affect one’s ability to obtain equal or similar services elsewhere.

Whatever we think of certain people, we can’t have one rule for some and another for others.

This is the pitfall of fairness, it is fair to everyone

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Banks should generally avoid taking political stances.
They should focus on trying to serve their customers well.
They‘ve been a little patchy at this over recent years.

Banks have a duty not to handle money launderers. I am not saying this was the case here, but it is a political stance.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Hmm.

I think his point is a bit strained.

I have every sympathy for people affected by trials that get postponed, especially for such an impactful crime.

However, it’s a rather separate thing. Also as much as we all dislike Farage, this particular case has brought up the bigger issue of whether banks can arbitrarily dump customers they don’t agree with. Indeed, I think this one will see laws changed or at the very least tightened up.

It’s different to other businesses. If a financial institution black-balls an individual, that will affect one’s ability to obtain equal or similar services elsewhere.

Whatever we think of certain people, we can’t have one rule for some and another for others.

This is the pitfall of fairness, it is fair to everyone

The point being one person, not a politician, just a tv presenter, was told by his bank, that he couldn't have the best account, but offered an alternative account.
Do you think Parliamentary time, and money would be wasted if Sally Nugent, or Naga Munchetty had said the same?

The Criminal Justice System has been deprived of massive funds ever since 2010, and people who are victims of really awful crimes are left to stew in limbo because the government isn't bothered.
The government is bothered by one hypocritical grifter. Why?

 

[Acker79]

Hmm.

I think his point is a bit strained.

I have every sympathy for people affected by trials that get postponed, especially for such an impactful crime.

However, it’s a rather separate thing. Also as much as we all dislike Farage, this particular case has brought up the bigger issue of whether banks can arbitrarily dump customers they don’t agree with. Indeed, I think this one will see laws changed or at the very least tightened up.

It’s different to other businesses. If a financial institution black-balls an individual, that will affect one’s ability to obtain equal or similar services elsewhere.

Whatever we think of certain people, we can’t have one rule for some and another for others.

This is the pitfall of fairness, it is fair to everyone

What is the point of changing or tightening the laws, when the legal system is in the state it is? TSB regularly posts about such things - the emptiness of political promises to increase maximum sentences, etc. when courts are closed, CPS, police and legal aid are all underfunded.

It's easy and cheap for politicians to criticise the banks on Farage's behalf. IF they really want to do anything about it, they need to sort out the legal system, without doing so, any changes to the law they make (to protect ordinary people, of couse, not for Farage's benefit) are meaningless spin.

 

[Farehamseagull]

And now the disingenuous **** wants the whole board to resign.

Why do we still have to hear from him and see his vile, pig ugly face?! Can’t he just f*** off into a black hole forever. He won his xenophobic battle and f***ed the country up for a very long time, is he not happy with that result?!

Just piss off you despicable charlatan.

 

[A1X]

Hmm.

I think his point is a bit strained.

I have every sympathy for people affected by trials that get postponed, especially for such an impactful crime.

However, it’s a rather separate thing. Also as much as we all dislike Farage, this particular case has brought up the bigger issue of whether banks can arbitrarily dump customers they don’t agree with. Indeed, I think this one will see laws changed or at the very least tightened up.

It’s different to other businesses. If a financial institution black-balls an individual, that will affect one’s ability to obtain equal or similar services elsewhere.

Whatever we think of certain people, we can’t have one rule for some and another for others.

This is the pitfall of fairness, it is fair to everyone

I don't disagree with your conclusions, however I think the point about the at times saturation coverage of the issue at the expense of several other topics which have far more bearing on ordinary people's lives is also very valid in my opinion.

 

[Eeyore]

Well yes, but it's not as if he's said that the first-born child of every immigrant should be sacrificed to Odin. He is an obnoxious twerp with outdated views, we all accept that, but he's done nothing illegal and he deserves a full apology from Coutts/Nat West - especially seeing how poorly it was handled. I used to think 'Cancel Culture' was just an invention of the right-wing press but I'm not so sure now.

Anyway, now look what you've made me do, you've made me stick up for Nigel Farage. I'm off for a lie down ...

Similar feeling here. She had to resign.