“Prejudiced and nasty” Nigel Farage…

[MangetoutsaysGetOutMan]

… doesn’t understand irony.

Monzo's rules, and apparently other banks too, since GM says others have turned down applications.

So I repeat, how are perfectly legal political parties, clubs and other organisations supposed to operate without banking facilities?

i see no grounds here to suggest that she was told the reason when she says she wasn’t.
anyway we will see what her DSAR brings up.

It's in the BBC story.

"However, earlier this month, Ms Miller received an email from the bank which read: "Unfortunately we can't tell you why we're closing your account.""

The issues surely must be:
Are the banks claiming to be operating within their rules?
Are their rules fair/reasonable?
Are they legal?

At what point since 2008 did so many people suddenly start thinking that banks must be allowed to operate as they see fit on the assumption that they'll naturally do so in a way that will benefit the public?

It’s a mystery. Banking has always been highly regulated, more so since 2008 for obvious reasons. This free market free for all that the farage haters suddenly claim to be happy with hasn’t existed for a very, very long time.
No one of any political stripe seriously disputes there should be regulation of banks - the question is what should that look like and how free should they be to dispense with customers.

And how is a democracy supposed to run if political parties cannot get bank accounts, or have them closed down randomly?

And as a PP said, how come Monzo refused to tell Gina Millar why her own party's bank account was closed down, but was happy to tell the BBC as soon as it asked?

"Bankers" have been baddies for years. But the minute they cause Nigel Farrage some distress, they're goodies. Isn't that amazing!

This ‘dangerous precedence’ was set years ago when banks closed Muslims’ accounts. Muslim individuals, their partners and children, Muslim organisations, Muslim charities…

Peter Oborne who was the then Chief Political Commentator for the Telegraph wanted to write about it, but the Telegraph refused to publish the story because HSBC (the bank in question) was a major advertiser.

Oborne did continue to write about the scandal in other smaller newspapers. He au noted that not a single major newspaper followed it up.

Then comes along poor Farage complaining about not being able to stash his millions in Coutts and it’s national media outrage.

Very true! 😂

The bank staff opened the account.

The Political Party has a legal existance similar to the bank having a legal existance.
But they both need to have a named person(s) who authorise payments.
Baring fraud the responisible person for payments are the board who delegate the grunt work.
For a PEP controls the bank is more worried about you as a donor that the person who makes the payments.
She a PEP controls the account (member of board/CEO)
They messed up by opening the account.
They can claim that as a small bank (while they have a full retail banking licence) they do not have the capacity to deal with PEP's.
That should be in the T&C.
But if this is the case the account opening process (automatic and human checks) should have prevented the account being opened in the first place.
Q: what is your business reason for opening an account.
Once opened the bank discover the mistake and write to the customer ( PEP ) that per T&C the bank account will be closed.

Neat and tidy and NB proof that the bank's system caught an error and while they carried out business in breach of their licence it was accidental and should not result in their licence being removed.
Guess who that report should go to...

This ‘dangerous precedence’ was set years ago when banks closed Muslims’ accounts. Muslim individuals, their partners and children, Muslim organisations, Muslim charities…

You mean the ones who was found to be funding terrorism?

It is quite funny that the Guardian (and the terminally online) was so desperate to find a conflicting position they found groups which have (or at the time) openly supported terrorist groups or had proven links to them, ignoring the fact that Muslims have their own bank and very strict rules on borrowing and lending,,,

At least there is Gina Millar who has come out, and a few in the past around the GC issue, but to try and drag this story down into the gutter of IDPOL is typical Guardian tier 'critical thinking'...

So I repeat, how are perfectly legal political parties, clubs and other organisations supposed to operate without banking facilities?

Yes and presumably the Labour, Tory and LibDems have a bank account. Very strange.

Political parties' accounts are available on the Electoral Commission site
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/media-centre/uk-political-parties-accounts-published-0

I don't know whether accounts normally note where entities bank and I don't currently have the time or facilities to download files from the above (on phone on the go).

I may have a shot at it later on.

Miller is as much a self publicist as Farage, as such I have my suspicions about her timings of this announcement.

So I repeat, how are perfectly legal political parties, clubs and other organisations supposed to operate without banking facilities?

Not sure why you expect us to give you the answer so repeating the question is pointless.

A quick Google suggests the main political organisations have accounts with the big four so I'm sure they are available.

The timing is evidently due to the fact that Gina Miller received the email from Monzo "earlier this month" - see the BBC site.

The timing of the attention will be because the media are now prepared to listen to her and carry the story in the wake of the Farage furore.

Of all the people I can imagine "just trying it on", Gina Miller isn't one of them.

And of all the people Gina Miller wouldn't want to be associated with, in any way, for any cause, Farage will be top of her list.

So, no, I don't think she has engineered this.

Why are so many people so determined to stick up for bankers?!

A delicious irony, there.

I think a lot of people have quite authoritarian instincts and they aren’t too bothered about how they indulge them.

Where abouts would you place Nat West?
A big four ?
Top 20?
Top 200?

I am not sure what you are asking, Farage and Miller and two completely different cases, Farage was a personal account, Miller's wasnt.

Why do you think the banking rules should be different between two legal entity?

From Sky News, 26th July, on Farage's video about Coutts:
"He said NatWest, the owner of Coutts, offered him an account after his announcement last week, but it was not suitable because it was a personal and not a business account."

So no, the account that was closed can't have been a personal account, since a personal account with NatWest wasn't suitable to replace it.

Because everyone should have right to a bank account, business's/non personal are completely different.