O/T:- Banks

[OchPie]

Agree to disagree there Och Pie.

Fair enough, but I'm still pretty sure Coutts didn't suddenly wake up and learn about Farage's views this year.

Their commercial terms are three million in savings, or one million in mortgage outstanding or investment. Farage said on Newsnight he couldn't meet that any more.

[keldsyke]

Fair enough, but I'm still pretty sure Coutts didn't suddenly wake up and learn about Farage's views this year.

Their commercial terms are three million in savings, or one million in mortgage outstanding or investment. Farage said on Newsnight he couldn't meet that any more.

I can tell you as I'm sat here with someone who has a Coutts account and that they have and never had nowhere near what they state the minimum requirements are.... regardless that is not the issue, if some Bank or Company can build a dossier on you on what you're views are and then decide `not to deal with you based on what certain people at the top of the organisation thinks is deeply worrying.

[OchPie]

I can tell you as I'm sat here with someone who has a Coutts account and that they have and never had nowhere near what they state the minimum requirements are.... regardless that is not the issue, if some Bank or Company can build a dossier on you on what you're views are and then decide `not to deal with you based on what certain people at the top of the organisation thinks is deeply worrying.

Sure, Coutts can and do make exceptions. The point is they have to want to.

I'd be shocked if private elite banks like Coutts don't have dossiers on pretty much every customer they have (and thick ones for any current or former PEP like Farage). Risk management and regulatory compliance are some of the biggest core functions of a bank, and for banks like them a large part of those activities will come down to who their individual customers are. Of course if a customer doesn't broadcast their views, the bank won't know all that much about their views.

[crazyfists]

So the alternative to opting for "a quite outrageous level of pressure to vote Remain, including a one-sided Government leaflet funded by the public purse" was to vote for a pack of outrageous lies by vote Leave. Not alleged lies, but proven lies with the benefit of hindsight.

So tell us how this "rare but magnificent democratic moment when the public refused to do what they were told by the vested interests and power brokers" has been magnificent? Also tell us how many promises have been realised and how many were lies?

What exactly are the benefits of Brexit?

This. Why would you be glad you've voted for something, that was predicted and also realised, that made your fellow Brits worse off. To stick it to the man? The man was on both sides, it's like the new extreme right conservatives saying they're going to take the Establishment down, they are the Establishment.

Also the public were told to vote leave for x, y and z reasons which have proved to be lies. Austerity and demonisation of immigrants plus the lies won the vote. My wife voted leave as she says 'cause they said the NHS would get more money' and this 21 year old woman at work said she didn't know which way to vote so just asked her grandparents as they know more. If you don't know which way you should vote then don't vote!

I'm just suprised you're glad you voted for leave, glad for what reason, I don't get it.

[Magpies1959]

Very true Keld, it is a good thing that Farage stuck to his guns to highlight how he had been treated. If as looks likely we become a cashless society in the not too distant future, then banks could be cancelling people on their beliefs and interests, very scary. We are getting closer and closer to thought control.

[jonnyt1]

Alty Pie, exactly plus more. John Major signed up to Maastricht without a referendum. That single act removed major constitutional powers from the UK. We were heading feet first into another Soviet Union being created.

I personally voted Brexit not for financial gain (though there will be benefits along with losses) but for democracy and self determination.

Free trade deals yes, forming super states with unelected bureaucrats no.

So far its not going bad, second largest growing economy in Europe according to the OECD, only Greece above us, fuelled by UK tourism...

[Elite_Pie]

So far its not going bad

Nice to see your judgement is as good as it's always been!

[keldsyke]

At last, Alison Rose has done the right thing although again the resignation statement stinks of arrogance. More to follow please along with the rights of freedom of speech not to be assessed and acted on by Banks and Large corporations (or Governments)

Anyone else see the Irony in the 'BBC Verify' campaign launched recently and the inaccuracy of what they reported, you couldn't make it up.

[Newish Pie]

At last, Alison Rose has done the right thing although again the resignation statement stinks of arrogance. More to follow please along with the rights of freedom of speech not to be assessed and acted on by Banks and Large corporations (or Governments)

Anyone else see the Irony in the 'BBC Verify' campaign launched recently and the inaccuracy of what they reported, you couldn't make it up.

Isn't it fascinating how the BBC is held to far higher standards than any other news organisation? To some extent that's entirely correct, because it's the national broadcaster. But the BBC also reports critically on itself, which other news organisations don't. It would be nice to see other media organisations held to anything approaching the same standards.

I struggle to see what the BBC has done that's so awful here. They reported a story in good faith based on what they took to be good information, which turned out to be incorrect. They then apologised. This kind of thing happens all the time.

The BBC covers criticism of the BBC... it reports on itself as a new story. The billionaire press will only publish tiny corrections that no-one will ever see, and only when forced.

[keldsyke]

Isn't it fascinating how the BBC is held to far higher standards than any other news organisation? To some extent that's entirely correct, because it's the national broadcaster. But the BBC also reports critically on itself, which other news organisations don't. It would be nice to see other media organisations held to anything approaching the same standards.

I struggle to see what the BBC has done that's so awful here. They reported a story in good faith based on what they took to be good information, which turned out to be incorrect. They then apologised. This kind of thing happens all the time.

The BBC covers criticism of the BBC... it reports on itself as a new story. The billionaire press will only publish tiny corrections that no-one will ever see, and only when forced.

They used to be held in high esteem by me, and as someone who lived and worked in the EU I would always be the first to praise them to fellow Europeans, but what with Saville, Bashir etc coverups and particularly how they report with bias I don't trust them at all, but you are right it applies to I'm guessing nearly every news organisation and how they want to push their narrative.