4 ms·

No fan of Farage, but then why was most of the document the bank produced about what he did as a politician? Farage also claims he never met these supposed thre

by xioxox 3y ago

No fan of Farage, but then why was most of the document the bank produced about what he did as a politician? Farage also claims he never met these supposed thresholds.

bostik 3y ago
Combination of reputational damage[0] and him being a PEP. I believe the account closure was a business decision, but they definitely had no reason to be public about it. One good thing came out of the debacle, though: it put the spotlight on UK retail banking regulations and how they are allowed to treat customers in the first place. Financial institutions don't like small-time PEPs. They don't net the banks anywhere near the money dictators and kleptocrats do, but are just as likely to engage in ongoing bribery due to their position in society. 0: Farage had apparently been very vocal about having an account with Coutts, and waving that thing around as a sign of ... something. For the bank, that was negative brand value.
- HenryBemis 3y ago
  Negative brand value is no reason to debank someone, half musicians that do drugs would give their bank a bad name. There must be a legal basis to debank someone. I don't like Farage's opinions, and being a PEP only means "more eyes on you", doesn't mean "kick them out". 1) Now, if Coutts dropped the ball on something, shame on them. A good lawyer can get some good ££££ for damaging the client's business/etc. 2) If Farage didn't mean a minimum-net-worth.. that's another story.
  - maccard 3y ago
    Farage didn't meet their net worth requirement, which is why his account was closed. A bit like any retail banking product - e.g. HSBC advance, there can be some slack in how strictly the rules are allied. Coutts decided that since he no longer met their net worth requirements, they didn't want to continue to serve him. They may have decided to continue serving other clients whos circumstances changed though for their own reasons. If farage had met the requirements, none of this would have happened.
    - naasking 3y ago
      > Farage didn't meet their net worth requirement, which is why his account was closed. Not according to follow-up reports: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38159768 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38159768
      - maccard 3y ago
        That's not what that says. The quote from coutts is even in the HN comment - > We acknowledge that the information we reported - that Coutts' decision on Mr Farage's account did not involve considerations about his political views - turned out not to be accurate and have apologised to Mr Farage That does not say that he did meet the net worth requirements. See [0], and read the article. No outlet has retracted the claim that he didn't meet the wealth requirements which is why his account was flagged for review. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jul/21/bbc-amends-story-on-closure-of-farages-coutts-bank-account https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jul/21/bbc-amends-sto...
- sgjohnson 3y ago
  > and him being a PEP. I'm a immediate relative of a PEP. And banks treat those just like they treat PEPs. I've banked in 4 different countries with about 10 banks total, disclosed to them the fact that I'm a PEP or an immediate relative of one, and it has never, ever caused any issue.
- Pet_Ant 3y ago
  PEP = politically exposed person ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politically_exposed_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politically_exposed_person > In financial regulation, a politically exposed person (PEP) is one who has been entrusted with a prominent public function. A PEP generally presents a higher risk for potential involvement in bribery and corruption by virtue of their position and the influence they may hold. The terms "politically exposed person" and senior foreign political figure are often used interchangeably, particularly in international forums. Best I could find.

by xioxox 3y ago

No fan of Farage, but then why was most of the document the bank produced about what he did as a politician? Farage also claims he never met these supposed thresholds.

bostik 3y ago

Combination of reputational damage[0] and him being a PEP. I believe the account closure was a business decision, but they definitely had no reason to be public about it. One good thing came out of the debacle, though: it put the spotlight on UK retail banking regulations and how they are allowed to treat customers in the first place. Financial institutions don't like small-time PEPs. They don't net the banks anywhere near the money dictators and kleptocrats do, but are just as likely to engage in ongoing bribery due to their position in society. 0: Farage had apparently been very vocal about having an account with Coutts, and waving that thing around as a sign of ... something. For the bank, that was negative brand value.

HenryBemis 3y ago
Negative brand value is no reason to debank someone, half musicians that do drugs would give their bank a bad name. There must be a legal basis to debank someone. I don't like Farage's opinions, and being a PEP only means "more eyes on you", doesn't mean "kick them out". 1) Now, if Coutts dropped the ball on something, shame on them. A good lawyer can get some good ££££ for damaging the client's business/etc. 2) If Farage didn't mean a minimum-net-worth.. that's another story.
- maccard 3y ago
  Farage didn't meet their net worth requirement, which is why his account was closed. A bit like any retail banking product - e.g. HSBC advance, there can be some slack in how strictly the rules are allied. Coutts decided that since he no longer met their net worth requirements, they didn't want to continue to serve him. They may have decided to continue serving other clients whos circumstances changed though for their own reasons. If farage had met the requirements, none of this would have happened.
  - naasking 3y ago
    > Farage didn't meet their net worth requirement, which is why his account was closed. Not according to follow-up reports: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38159768 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38159768
    - maccard 3y ago
      That's not what that says. The quote from coutts is even in the HN comment - > We acknowledge that the information we reported - that Coutts' decision on Mr Farage's account did not involve considerations about his political views - turned out not to be accurate and have apologised to Mr Farage That does not say that he did meet the net worth requirements. See [0], and read the article. No outlet has retracted the claim that he didn't meet the wealth requirements which is why his account was flagged for review. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jul/21/bbc-amends-story-on-closure-of-farages-coutts-bank-account https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jul/21/bbc-amends-sto...
sgjohnson 3y ago
> and him being a PEP. I'm a immediate relative of a PEP. And banks treat those just like they treat PEPs. I've banked in 4 different countries with about 10 banks total, disclosed to them the fact that I'm a PEP or an immediate relative of one, and it has never, ever caused any issue.
Pet_Ant 3y ago
PEP = politically exposed person ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politically_exposed_person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politically_exposed_person > In financial regulation, a politically exposed person (PEP) is one who has been entrusted with a prominent public function. A PEP generally presents a higher risk for potential involvement in bribery and corruption by virtue of their position and the influence they may hold. The terms "politically exposed person" and senior foreign political figure are often used interchangeably, particularly in international forums. Best I could find.