First Direct and Natwest closing bank accounts for political reasons inc being gender critical

[Snorkers]

Apprently First Direct have closed the account of the Wings over Scotland founder for his beliefs (He's Gender Critical), and Coutts, owned by Natwest, closed Nigel Farage's account.
Whatever you think of Nigel Farage he is entitled to a bank account.

This is really worrying.

I bank with First Direct. I am gender critical. Do I need to hide my beliefs to keep my bank account? Will tey stop me getting access to my money?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12249755/Nigel-Farage-claims-three-loved-ones-bank-accounts-closed-Brexit.html

I used to use to bank in branch with staff to help save their jobs.

I will now avoid banking staff at all costs, I am not risking looking at them the wrong way and being cancelled.

This is so bad. If we are heading towards becoming a cashless society they cannot possibly allow this type of discrimination by banks to continue.

Farage has never held office, how can he be a Politically Exposed Person?

Nothing has been done for years about Annexe B, about mixed sex toilets in schools, nothing will be done about this.

I am avoiding bank staff now, I will use the cash machines inside the branch, rather than even look at them now.

The line on my statement for Maya's case said it was for Crowdjustice, but not what case it was for. So I don't think your bank could know who you've supported.

He was an MEP and the leader of a political party.

Just think how hard banks will be able to make things for people if cash is completely phased out.

It's all very well people saying they don't use cash much, but cash doesn't tell you to mind your mouth & keep your perfectly run of the mill opinions to yourself if you want to be able to shop or pay your bills.

This is another good reason why people should support the use of physical cash.

I don't want to be tied to digital 'cash' either, which will be just as vulnerable as a bank account to someone pressing a 'computer says no' button if they decide you aren't 'the right sort' & fucking up your life.

At the end of the day, a bank doesn't have to do business with you, just like if you run a shop you don't have to serve everyone that comes in. You can refuse service to anyone you don't want to serve.

This simply isn’t true. If you offer a service you can’t refuse to serve people on the basis of a PC. That called discrimination and it’s unlawful.

Unless it’s one of the exceptions that is.

It might not be for a steep premium.

Religious groups might set them up with an aim of supporting believers for believing in things deemed beyond the pale by mainstream banks such as “male and female he created them”. They might invite non believers to access their services to as they have done in the past with other services and not be looking to make vast profits.

Or maybe women’s groups will have the skills and finances to set up banks for people who believe that sex is real, significant, observable and immutable.

It would be hard to exist only on cash now. I don’t know how I would get paid, my employer would not be able to pay me in cash, I don’t know how I would pay my household bills. Even if I could find menial cash in hand work I suppose I would be without utilities if I didn’t have access to a bank account.

We are so dependent on banks now. They hold a great deal of power.

Your problem will be if the other banks refuse to interact with Bank of Adam and Eve. If the utilities companies refuse to take direct debits from BoAaE. If the banking regulator refuses to approve BoAaE as a bank.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p04b183c/hypernormalisation

I was thinking about this today, with the banks and riots in France.

In practical terms though, the average person who is GC this won’t affect, I just don’t see how FD could possibly find out and then go to the effort for closing down an account. I know for a fact their onboarding and downgrading and closing of dormant accounts isn’t that slick. Maybe if someone was incredibly verbally abusive and very very anti trans on the phone (but how would that even come up) and they had it recorded, who A big ‘celebrity’ or well known person who’s known to be anti trans they might do it, largely for virtue signalling purposes. But banks are very big on the pronouns thing.

new consumer duty isn’t in effect until July this year on open products and as there are other bank accounts around that are free, and providing they didn’t leave people without access to funds or to pay bills then by closing an account for what would be bracketed as ‘hate speech’ might not be what CD would classify as a poor customer outcome.

He is, it’s not necessarily about holding political office, it’s more about his prominence

banks are very big on the pronouns thing.

When big conservative organisations like banks support your cause, your cause isn't in any way revolutionary.

If the banks really cared about trans people, they'd divest from places like Saudi Arabia and Brunei where cross-dressing is criminalised.

Hence why I said it was virtue signalling

ps it’s not my cause. I’ll do my best to respect how someone wants me to call them as a professional courtesy but nie nem nier and some of things we all see happening is quite concerning

What is Annex B? Google isn't helping me

ps it’s not my cause.

The second person pronouns have several meanings. The first is referring to a specific person or group of people directly. Example: "please give me your coat so that I can hang it up".

The second meaning refers to an undefined group of people. Historically, the pronoun "one" was used for this purpose, but it's deemed old-fashioned and I am mocked when I use it.

The third meaning, which works better in person when I can turn my gaze to the audience, is addressing onlookers who are witnessing a conversation.

When big conservative organisations like banks support a cause, that cause isn't in any way revolutionary would have been clearer wording but loses the rhetorical device of addressing the "board monitor" TRA audience with the you.

Haven't read the full thread but his bank came our bad said he could have a personal account but not a business account. He's not being left with nothing

https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/nhs-operational-planning-and-contracting-guidance-2019-20-annex-b-guidance-for-operational-and-activity-plans-assurance-statements/

Annex B of what? The FATF Guidance has annexes (although Annex 1 is more relevant).

www.fatf-gafi.org/content/dam/fatf-gafi/guidance/Guidance-PEP-Rec12-22.pdf.coredownload.pdf

He's not being left with nothing

He's been removed from banking for his business. It's dark AF