Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
This Is Incredible !!!
Nigel Farage may be hounded out of the UK
Answers
It seems that any suspicion gives banks the right to close accounts, without explanation, to avoid risk, even when such suspicion/
22:20 Fri 30th Jun 2023
Farage says that the ‘right’ to have a bank account was withdrawn. Isn’t it ironic that the EU campaigned for a legal right to have a bank account for all citizens living in an EU member state back in 2014:
https:/
There is now a right for EU citizens to have a bank account:
https:/
Oh dear, Nige. What did you do?
https:/
There is now a right for EU citizens to have a bank account:
https:/
Oh dear, Nige. What did you do?
This ducking and diving around the real issue is entertaining, but it means the real issue isn't being addressed. The fact is here is successful businessman, a controversial public figure, hated by the establishment but admired by a good proportion of the population at large, someone who hasn't been charged with any crime but has been disparaged in parliament without redress, whose bank accounts, which have lots of money in them and are used regularly, have, after 40 years, been closed very suddenly by his bank with no explanation. Like him or not, and regardless of political persuasion, this is -allegedly - still a free country and therefore the question that should be on everyone's lips is 'why?' Why isn't it?
Hymie, I haven't seen him saying he knew Brexit would be an absolute disaster for the UK banking sector. All I've seen him say is that Brexit has been mismanaged.
Hymie, I haven't seen him saying he knew Brexit would be an absolute disaster for the UK banking sector. All I've seen him say is that Brexit has been mismanaged.
// The fact is here is [a] successful businessman... whose bank accounts... have, after 40 years, been closed very suddenly by his bank with no explanation... //
Hardly "very suddenly", as he was given two months' notice. While the explanation of "commercial reasons" as Farage states it is altogether too vague for my liking, private businesses nevertheless aren't obligated to give detailed reasons. From, for example, Nationwide's T&Cs:
// 78. We may close your account immediately and without notice in exceptional circumstances. These might include:
a) we are legally required to close the account;
b) you have carried out (or we reasonably suspect you have carried out) illegal or fraudulent activity on the account;
...
or
h) we reasonably consider that we may be exposed to action from any government, Regulator or law enforcement agency. //
I deleted reasons (c)-(g) as they are obviously irrelevant in this case. I suspect that other agreements with other banks are similar.
The part that I think is most relevant is that the bank may only "reasonably suspect" illegal activity, or "reasonably consider" that they may be exposed to Government action. What counts as "reasonable" is presumably something that can be tested according to an objective measure, and I hasten to add that I am not accusing Farage of being involved in any illegal activities. But if, for example, the bank has information that suggests that he *might* be, then the bank is entitled to close the account without waiting for the Courts to find that he *is*.
Terms in Barclays T&Cs are similar:
// We can close an account... by giving you at least two months’ notice. ... we’ll tell you why we’re ending the agreement unless doing so would be unlawful (emphasis added).
We may also end this agreement immediately or on less notice... if we reasonably believe you have seriously or persistently broken any terms of the agreement. We can also do this if we have reasonable grounds for thinking you have done any of the following things, all of
which this agreement prohibits:
• You put us in a position where we might break a law, regulation, code or other duty that applies to us if we maintain your account, or keeping your account open exposes us to action or censure from any government, regulator, or law enforcement agency.
...
• You use or try to use your account illegally or for criminal activity, including receiving proceeds of crime into your account – or you let someone else do this ... //
Again, the stress is on "reasonable belief", and I find the added comment compared to Nationwide that Barclays may on occasion find that it is "unlawful" to reveal the reasons for their closing the account to be significant in terms of the bank(s) apparently being extremely vague.
There's a lot more to this story, as I say, that Farage has revealed. Whether that's because he personally is hiding something, or because he hasn't been sufficiently made aware of what's gone on, I don't know. But I don't take his suggestion of an Establishment plot seriously at this stage, and there are multiple other possible explanations.
Again, although in this comment I've focused on possible illegal activity reasons, I don't personally intend to accuse Farage of any such activity, either directly or otherwise. I'm simply saying that (a) the bank is entitled to close his (or anybody else's) account, (b) that they do not need to give much notice (although it is typical to provide two months' notice where possible), (c) that there may well be legal reasons behind their vagueness at this stage.
Hardly "very suddenly", as he was given two months' notice. While the explanation of "commercial reasons" as Farage states it is altogether too vague for my liking, private businesses nevertheless aren't obligated to give detailed reasons. From, for example, Nationwide's T&Cs:
// 78. We may close your account immediately and without notice in exceptional circumstances. These might include:
a) we are legally required to close the account;
b) you have carried out (or we reasonably suspect you have carried out) illegal or fraudulent activity on the account;
...
or
h) we reasonably consider that we may be exposed to action from any government, Regulator or law enforcement agency. //
I deleted reasons (c)-(g) as they are obviously irrelevant in this case. I suspect that other agreements with other banks are similar.
The part that I think is most relevant is that the bank may only "reasonably suspect" illegal activity, or "reasonably consider" that they may be exposed to Government action. What counts as "reasonable" is presumably something that can be tested according to an objective measure, and I hasten to add that I am not accusing Farage of being involved in any illegal activities. But if, for example, the bank has information that suggests that he *might* be, then the bank is entitled to close the account without waiting for the Courts to find that he *is*.
Terms in Barclays T&Cs are similar:
// We can close an account... by giving you at least two months’ notice. ... we’ll tell you why we’re ending the agreement unless doing so would be unlawful (emphasis added).
We may also end this agreement immediately or on less notice... if we reasonably believe you have seriously or persistently broken any terms of the agreement. We can also do this if we have reasonable grounds for thinking you have done any of the following things, all of
which this agreement prohibits:
• You put us in a position where we might break a law, regulation, code or other duty that applies to us if we maintain your account, or keeping your account open exposes us to action or censure from any government, regulator, or law enforcement agency.
...
• You use or try to use your account illegally or for criminal activity, including receiving proceeds of crime into your account – or you let someone else do this ... //
Again, the stress is on "reasonable belief", and I find the added comment compared to Nationwide that Barclays may on occasion find that it is "unlawful" to reveal the reasons for their closing the account to be significant in terms of the bank(s) apparently being extremely vague.
There's a lot more to this story, as I say, that Farage has revealed. Whether that's because he personally is hiding something, or because he hasn't been sufficiently made aware of what's gone on, I don't know. But I don't take his suggestion of an Establishment plot seriously at this stage, and there are multiple other possible explanations.
Again, although in this comment I've focused on possible illegal activity reasons, I don't personally intend to accuse Farage of any such activity, either directly or otherwise. I'm simply saying that (a) the bank is entitled to close his (or anybody else's) account, (b) that they do not need to give much notice (although it is typical to provide two months' notice where possible), (c) that there may well be legal reasons behind their vagueness at this stage.
Bryant won't repeat what his said using parliamentary privilege...why is that?
is the rest of the thread of any interest
anyway the answer to the above is
Bryant said in parliament in a debate that NF had had half a mill off Russian TV which is an organ of the (russian) state
and it was announced then that Farage had had an intervention from his bank. Coutts. article in Times today
If the russian tv DOES count as a russian state organ, then sanctions and sanctions busting goes live
Altho Farage had denied this - - - Coutts the bank will know ( coz they are the bank see?) in which case an SAR is in order and closure of the account may well be warranted
Honestly I wdnt go around saying my bank has closed my back account - it is VERY unlikely to be bad publicity for the bank
is the rest of the thread of any interest
anyway the answer to the above is
Bryant said in parliament in a debate that NF had had half a mill off Russian TV which is an organ of the (russian) state
and it was announced then that Farage had had an intervention from his bank. Coutts. article in Times today
If the russian tv DOES count as a russian state organ, then sanctions and sanctions busting goes live
Altho Farage had denied this - - - Coutts the bank will know ( coz they are the bank see?) in which case an SAR is in order and closure of the account may well be warranted
Honestly I wdnt go around saying my bank has closed my back account - it is VERY unlikely to be bad publicity for the bank
'Why?' is what he's asking, Ich, but he can't get an answer - and he's not alone.
because if it is money laundering ( under rthe law and not in Naomis mind) then asnwering why may be 'tipping off'
s 333 of something - AB I cant be arrissed to find out which section. Friday blooz
Section 333 creates the offence of making a disclosure likely to prejudice a money laundering investigation being undertaken or which may be undertaken by law enforcement authorities.
Farage is not a PEP or a POOP he is just a BF ( haw haw haw) for bringing this to the public's attention - and wibbling and wobbling
(yes I did very well when I was examined on MLR before the 2018 reforms ( MLR got worse)
because if it is money laundering ( under rthe law and not in Naomis mind) then asnwering why may be 'tipping off'
s 333 of something - AB I cant be arrissed to find out which section. Friday blooz
Section 333 creates the offence of making a disclosure likely to prejudice a money laundering investigation being undertaken or which may be undertaken by law enforcement authorities.
Farage is not a PEP or a POOP he is just a BF ( haw haw haw) for bringing this to the public's attention - and wibbling and wobbling
(yes I did very well when I was examined on MLR before the 2018 reforms ( MLR got worse)
I take that as an insult frankly :P
I do realise that the comment strays into insinuating that Farage has been fraudulent. I don't mean for it to. I would have no information on which to base such an assertion, other than his account being closed, which could be for multiple other reasons (e.g. the (c)-(f) I deleted). The mere fact that I don't take his account to be the whole story doesn't then mean that I think, or wish to imply, that he's involved in illegal activity.
I do realise that the comment strays into insinuating that Farage has been fraudulent. I don't mean for it to. I would have no information on which to base such an assertion, other than his account being closed, which could be for multiple other reasons (e.g. the (c)-(f) I deleted). The mere fact that I don't take his account to be the whole story doesn't then mean that I think, or wish to imply, that he's involved in illegal activity.
Clar calm yourself
we live in strange times where calling a Prime minister ( well he was once) a liar is OK - and true !
Trump's charisma has lasted - "I wear my indictment as a sign that I will make america great again" and the crowds scream
Boris has tried it - the privileges committee is not a court and I have done nothing wrong - I havent!
and the crowd starts sniggering
Farage tried it - and an adequate explanation ( and reasonable one too) is that he has falled foul of the relevant legislation ( MLR)
we live in strange times where calling a Prime minister ( well he was once) a liar is OK - and true !
Trump's charisma has lasted - "I wear my indictment as a sign that I will make america great again" and the crowds scream
Boris has tried it - the privileges committee is not a court and I have done nothing wrong - I havent!
and the crowd starts sniggering
Farage tried it - and an adequate explanation ( and reasonable one too) is that he has falled foul of the relevant legislation ( MLR)
I am sure Mr Farage needs no lessons on what MLR is.
Early career
After leaving school in 1982, Farage obtained employment in the City of London, trading commodities at the London Metal Exchange.[6] Initially, he joined the American commodity operation of brokerage firm Drexel Burnham Lambert,[25] transferring to Crédit Lyonnais Rouse in 1986.[25] He joined Refco in 1994, and Natixis Metals in 2003.[25]
Farage joined the Conservative Party in 1978, but voted for the Green Party in 1989 because of what he saw as their then "sensible" and Eurosceptic policies.[33] He left the Conservatives in 1992 in protest at Prime Minister John Major's government's signing of the Treaty on European Union at Maastricht.[35][36]
Early career
After leaving school in 1982, Farage obtained employment in the City of London, trading commodities at the London Metal Exchange.[6] Initially, he joined the American commodity operation of brokerage firm Drexel Burnham Lambert,[25] transferring to Crédit Lyonnais Rouse in 1986.[25] He joined Refco in 1994, and Natixis Metals in 2003.[25]
Farage joined the Conservative Party in 1978, but voted for the Green Party in 1989 because of what he saw as their then "sensible" and Eurosceptic policies.[33] He left the Conservatives in 1992 in protest at Prime Minister John Major's government's signing of the Treaty on European Union at Maastricht.[35][36]
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles41 mins ago
ChatterBank76 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles83 mins ago
Body & Soul86 mins ago
