Banks closing accounts!

[Oldyella]

Do you need specialist banking products for political entities? If this is the case I can understand why Monzo did this.

I don't think so, although they would need extra checks as PEPs. I'm assuming their income comes via donations though, so might be tough to monitor via AML etc? I'm not in that area of banking though so could be wrong.

Their constitution says they are an unincorporated association though which appears to be a business that Monzo doesn't support, so they perhaps should never have opened an account in the first place?

OK that makes sense.


Hyperbole, sure, but closing bank accounts because of political opinions is very Russia-like.

Just because it happened to someone you dislike doesn’t suddenly make it “different”.

They offered him a replacement account though, just not the prestigious named one he had previously had. He was just asked to sit with us common natwest account holding oiks.

 

[Bert_]

Do you need specialist banking products for political entities? If this is the case I can understand why Monzo did this.

Banks generally want to avoid dealing with anyone politically active, regardless of their views. Simply not worth the risk of being associated with them unless you make a ton of money from them. Someone having a basic current account with you isn't an issue though generally. Being provided specialist banking services i.e. a Coutts account might be though. Especially if you are known to have current or previous dealings with sanctioned individuals.

 

[Wibble]

So what is it, did he lose his bank account because he didn’t have enough money or because of his political opinions?

If it’s the latter, then the difference between Britain and Putin’s Russia is not as big as we think.

Did you read anything about this? The banking group offered him account to replace the one he no longer qualified for. They didn't invade Ukraine as an alternative.

 

[fergieisold]

Banks generally want to avoid dealing with anyone politically active, regardless of their views. Simply not worth the risk of being associated with them unless you make a ton of money from them. Someone having a basic current account with you isn't an issue though generally. Being provided specialist banking services i.e. a Coutts account might be though. Especially if you are known to have current or previous dealings with sanctioned individuals.

It's interesting that individuals appear to be what's targeted here - I'm not sure I understand how they differ from something like the UK Tory party and why they clearly will be provided with banking. A quick google suggests Santander gave them 2 million quid credit line a couple of months ago!

 

[fergieisold]

So what is it, did he lose his bank account because he didn’t have enough money or because of his political opinions?

If it’s the latter, then the difference between Britain and Putin’s Russia is not as big as we think.

It read to me like the political opinions combined with the account falling under the threshold was the reason. But the political opinions seemingly did have a large influence on the decision.

 

[arnie_ni]

Absolutely ridiculous.

I mean I’m not going to lose any sleep over a bank CEO but the way this absolute non entity of a story has been spun by the usual suspects is truly taking the piss out of the public.

People are getting worked up over Farage rightly losing access to an account he no longer met the requirements for, whilst at the same time people are struggling to make ends meet and utility companies are posting 1000% profit increases.

It’s time to reboot the system.

Should it ever have been made public though? Is this not confidential information? I'd imagine that's why they had to resign. Not over actually refusing him the account which they had every right to do.

 

[Pexbo]

Should it ever have been made public though? Is this not confidential information? I'd imagine that's why they had to resign. Not over actually refusing him the account which they had every right to do.

Farage made it public after making a SAR.

 

[arnie_ni]

Farage made it public after making a SAR.

The bank just should have went no comment, can't discuss someone's finances. They allowed him to turn it into what it's turned into. I suppose they thought he could just lie and say they closed it for whatever reason he wanted to say so they decided to get out a head of it

 

[Pexbo]

The bank just should have went no comment, can't discuss someone's finances. They allowed him to turn it into what it's turned into. I suppose they thought he could just lie and say they closed it for whatever reason he wanted to say so they decided to get out a head of it

A subject access request is a GDPR compliance process. Every customer has a right to request all of their data and any records relating to them including internal communications about them or their accounts.

By law Coutts had to hand it all over. To hold any of it back would have been a much bigger scandal.

Once Farage had it he was free to do what he wanted with it which includes publishing it.

 

[Bert_]

It's interesting that individuals appear to be what's targeted here - I'm not sure I understand how they differ from something like the UK Tory party and why they clearly will be provided with banking. A quick google suggests Santander gave them 2 million quid credit line a couple of months ago!

You're over thinking it. It was a simple business decision. Coutts do business with people that make them money. If you don't make them enough money to be worth their while, they'll drop you.

Coutts decided doing business with Farage was more trouble than it was worth so decided to get rid. He was offered a standard bank account with their high street brand in lieu of his privileged account. He didn't like the idea of being lumped in with the general public and their regular bank accounts so he kicked off.

Coutts fecked up by indulging his claims about being "cancelled". They shouldn't have said anything. If they felt the need to, then they should have been honest and said that Farage's Coutts account carried too much risk to keep it on the books. They didn't deny him banking services, just downgraded him to a regular NatWest customer.

 

[RoadTrip]

Frankly Coutts and NatWest have every right to close an account. It’s just right wing media spin that turned what was likely a business decision given revenue generated from him in lieu of amount of funds & costs to maintain (which are higher given his position in politics) into “closed for political views”.

Notwithstanding that, the mistake was indulging him in public. It’s tricky because it’s a bit damned if you do, damned if you don’t. But the moment they spoke about confidential information, irrespective of whether they themselves divulged it first, is what made it tricky. In my view they should have simply issued a wishy washy statement and got on with their lives.

 

[fergieisold]

You're over thinking it. It was a simple business decision. Coutts do business with people that make them money. If you don't make them enough money to be worth their while, they'll drop you.

Coutts decided doing business with Farage was more trouble than it was worth so decided to get rid. He was offered a standard bank account with their high street brand in lieu of his privileged account. He didn't like the idea of being lumped in with the general public and their regular bank accounts so he kicked off.

Coutts fecked up by indulging his claims about being "cancelled". They shouldn't have said anything. If they felt the need to, then they should have been honest and said that Farage's Coutts account carried too much risk to keep it on the books. They didn't deny him banking services, just downgraded him to a regular NatWest customer.

I might have mis-read some of the previous documents posted in this thread, but it seems Coutts fecked up by discussing his political views and links in relation to account closure/downgrade. He was below the threshold, that should have been reason enough? Not very smart from them at all.

 

[Bert_]

I might have mis-read some of the previous documents posted in this thread, but it seems Coutts fecked up by discussing his political views and links in relation to account closure/downgrade. He was below the threshold, that should have been reason enough? Not very smart from them at all.

Coutts fecked up by acknowledging his nonsense. They are well within their rights to cease business with him if they think it's no longer profitable for them. That should have been the end of it. They shat the bed by engaging in his "I've been cancelled" bullshit. Just front it up and say you're gone because you're losing us money. Farage as a self-proclaimed Libertarian shouldn't have a problem with that position.

 

[fergieisold]

Coutts fecked up by acknowledging his nonsense. They are well within their rights to cease business with him if they think it's no longer profitable for them. That should have been the end of it. They shat the bed by engaging in his "I've been cancelled" bullshit. Just front it up and say you're gone because you're losing us money. Farage as a self-proclaimed Libertarian shouldn't have a problem with that position.

The thing is, if the communication internally is correct, he kind of was partly cancelled due to his political views. I can’t stand Farage, but it does seem it played a part.

in terms of him losing them money I don’t see how?

 

[Pexbo]

The thing is, if the communication internally is correct, he kind of was partly cancelled due to his political views. I can’t stand Farage, but it does seem it played a part.

in terms of him losing them money I don’t see how?

There’s a lot of due diligence required because of who he has done business with. That isn’t free. If he was a customer with tens or hundreds of millions they were managing they might see that as profitable. If he’s barely scraping into the requirements (£1m) for an account then he’s potentially costing them more than he’s earning if they have to verify and validate all his incomings.

 

[Infordin]

It read to me like the political opinions combined with the account falling under the threshold was the reason. But the political opinions seemingly did have a large influence on the decision.

Without a doubt.

Also, it looks like BBC apologized to him for claiming that his account did not have enough money. That turned out to be false:

https://amp.theguardian.com/politic...-to-apologise-over-coutts-bank-account-report

In other words, the closing of his bank account was a political decision. Very interesting…

 

[Rado_N]

Without a doubt.

Also, it looks like BBC apologized to him for claiming that his account did not have enough money. That turned out to be false:

https://amp.theguardian.com/politic...-to-apologise-over-coutts-bank-account-report

In other words, the closing of his bank account was a political decision. Very interesting…

It wasn’t false at all, and that’s not what that story says.

The BBC (ridiculously) apologised for it being “misleading” on the basis that it wasn’t the single reason in isolation.

To be absolutely clear; he did not meet their criteria and hadn’t done for some time. They decided it was no longer worth their while to continue to have him as a customer.

 

[fergieisold]

There’s a lot of due diligence required because of who he has done business with. That isn’t free. If he was a customer with tens or hundreds of millions they were managing they might see that as profitable. If he’s barely scraping into the requirements (£1m) for an account then he’s potentially costing them more than he’s earning if they have to verify and validate all his incomings.

Agh, fair enough! That makes sense.

 

[Oldyella]

I might have mis-read some of the previous documents posted in this thread, but it seems Coutts fecked up by discussing his political views and links in relation to account closure/downgrade. He was below the threshold, that should have been reason enough? Not very smart from them at all.

There was nothing really wrong with his Coutts file though, just showed they were doing their due diligence on a significant PEP. When his mortgage was repaid and they decided to exit and move him to Natwest they should have just issued bland statements in the press. They fell into exactly what the report warned about, that he would quickly air any dissatisfaction in national press.

As soon as they discussed specifics heads had to roll, but that doesn't mean Farage is right. So yeah, not very smart.

 

[TheGame]

Oh look, more lies by Farage to get attention!