Spockydog Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 I'm not in the business of dealing with moronic hypotheticals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horangi Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 OK, is there some reason one would want to have an account in particular at Coutts vs anywhere else? With all the things going on in the UK, how is this even a news item? Which Tyler, Spockydog and Gaston de Foix 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltaran Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 4 minutes ago, Heartofice said: It’s almost half owned by the government, you and me. Make of that what you will. That’s completely irrelevant to the definition of what a private bank is Prince of the North 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 3 minutes ago, Spockydog said: I'm not in the business of dealing with moronic hypotheticals. Its entirely pertinent to the conversation, it will allow you to realise that your celebration of these events might wipe the smile off your face when your communist leader gets removed from banking for his political views. If even you cannot see that I can't do any more. 2 minutes ago, horangi said: OK, is there some reason one would want to have an account in particular at Coutts vs anywhere else? With all the things going on in the UK, how is this even a news item? Banks being allowed to remove people from their books based on how they view their politics is a pretty massive news story actually and has much further reaching implications if applied elsewhere. How about you can't get a mortgage in the future because you supported Just Stop Oil or went on a protest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 3 minutes ago, Spockydog said: Lol. You really haven't got a clue. Quick, someone call the Private Banking Awards people. HoI has dropped the bombshell that Coutts is masquerading as a private bank, and should return all those private banking awards they have won over the years. From Coutts website: https://www.coutts.com/private-banking.html From wikipedia: Coutts & Co. is a British private bank and wealth manager headquartered in London. You guys are arguing over two different meanings of "private banking". (1) "private" banking referenced in the quote above means "concierge" banking. Coutts offers services like a dedicated account manager who will give you a call/appointment within 30 minutes. A showy, pointless reason to get lower interest rates, but England is full of status-obsessed arseholes so.... (2) Coutts is not a "public bank" - it is a partly publicly owned bank through its ultimate owner Natwest. Not sure what a public bank would be in the British context but the EBRD and the World Bank are public banks in the sense that they act for the public interest. (3) Not sure what anti-discrimination laws apply to banks. Not the HRA no matter how much public ownership there is. It's not a governmental entity. Nigel Farage bringing a HRA claim would be the ultimate in irony, but would almost certainly fail. There's about a million pages of banking regulations so maybe something specific about discrimination would apply, but doubt it would apply to discriminating against political views. (4) At the end of the day, Coutts is a bank that's all about image and prestige. There's really no reason to bank there except to say you have an account at Coutts (shorthand for saying you have a million pounds or whatever their current threshold is). For them to get rid of Nigel Farage is totally in keeping with their brand, just as refusing Mohammed Al Fayed would have been 20-30 years ago. Was it disgraceful behavior? Yes. Are you stupid for wanting to bank somewhere that doesn't want you? Yes. At the end of the day, Farage is a showman and troublemaker and they should never have accepted him in the first place. That, probably for reasons of ideological sympathy, was their original sin. Fragile Bird, Spockydog, Prince of the North and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 2 minutes ago, Maltaran said: That’s completely irrelevant to the definition of what a private bank is To help out a fellow boarder who is clearly confused, I was just about to post an article detailing what, exactly, constitutes a private bank, and how it has absolutely nothing to do with ownership structures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 Just now, Gaston de Foix said: You guys are arguing over two different meanings of "private banking". (1) "private" banking referenced in the quote above means "concierge" banking. Coutts offers services like a dedicated account manager who will give you a call/appointment within 30 minutes. A showy, pointless reason to get lower interest rates, but England is full of status-obsessed arseholes so.... (2) Coutts is not a "public bank" - it is a partly publicly owned bank through its ultimate owner Natwest. Not sure what a public bank would be in the British context but the EBRD and the World Bank are public banks in the sense that they act for the public interest. (3) Not sure what anti-discrimination laws apply to banks. Not the HRA no matter how much public ownership there is. It's not a governmental entity. Nigel Farage bringing a HRA claim would be the ultimate in irony, but would almost certainly fail. There's about a million pages of banking regulations so maybe something specific about discrimination would apply, but doubt it would apply to discriminating against political views. (4) At the end of the day, Coutts is a bank that's all about image and prestige. There's really no reason to bank there except to say you have an account at Coutts (shorthand for saying you have a million pounds or whatever their current threshold is). For them to get rid of Nigel Farage is totally in keeping with their brand, just as refusing Mohammed Al Fayed would have been 20-30 years ago. Was it disgraceful behavior? Yes. Are you stupid for wanting to bank somewhere that doesn't want you? Yes. At the end of the day, Farage is a showman and troublemaker and they should never have accepted him in the first place. That, probably for reasons of ideological sympathy, was their original sin. No. I know what it means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 1 minute ago, Heartofice said: Banks being allowed to remove people from their books based on how they view their politics is a pretty massive news story actually and has much further reaching implications if applied elsewhere. How about you can't get a mortgage in the future because you supported Just Stop Oil or went on a protest? Is there an epidemic of banks discriminating against innocent brexiteers I missed? Those vile, white-gloved Eurocrats handling (proverbiably) the KIng's money while planning world domination and rejoicing over the latest EU money laundering-directive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said: (3) Not sure what anti-discrimination laws apply to banks. Not the HRA no matter how much public ownership there is. It's not a governmental entity. Nigel Farage bringing a HRA claim would be the ultimate in irony, but would almost certainly fail. There's about a million pages of banking regulations so maybe something specific about discrimination would apply, but doubt it would apply to discriminating against political views. The chief executive of the FCA has stated publicly to the treasury select committee that banks are not able to discriminate on the basis of political views, and it was stated by coutts in the memo that they felt his values did not align with theirs.: (“[it] did not think continuing to bank NF was compatible with Coutts given his publicly-stated views that were at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation.”) It's pretty clear that is what they are doing, and have since rolled back original statements about why they wouldn't bank with Farage. Edited July 20, 2023 by Heartofice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaston de Foix Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 22 minutes ago, Heartofice said: The chief executive of the FCA has stated publicly to the treasury select committee that banks are not able to discriminate on the basis of political views, and it was stated by coutts in the memo that they felt his values did not align with theirs.: (“[it] did not think continuing to bank NF was compatible with Coutts given his publicly-stated views that were at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation.”) It's pretty clear that is what they are doing, and have since rolled back original statements about why they wouldn't bank with Farage. Yeah but two things can be true (1) Coutts wants to get rid of him; (2) Farage might not meet the banking thresholds and they are refusing to make an exception. The latter functions as an independent reason for terminating the banking relationship. Anyway, I stand by my original point. Coutts has freely discriminated against 99% of humanity for 99% of its history based on race, sex, ethnic origin, education etc. etc. Nigel Farage is welcome to the intersectionality, but let's not pretend that what has happened to him is uniquely heinous or inconsistent with newly invented British values. To answer your question, Coutts would never allow Jeremy Corbyn to open an account (nor would Corbyn ever try to, admittedly) or a Just Stop Oil protester or Gordon Brown. It's useful for everyone involved in this episode to pretend its not true, but it is. They have no obligation to accept or continue a customer. Spockydog and Prince of the North 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 1 minute ago, Gaston de Foix said: Anyway, I stand by my original point. Coutts has freely discriminated against 99% of humanity for 99% of its history based on race, sex, ethnic origin, education etc. etc. Nigel Farage is welcome to the intersectionality, but let's not pretend that what has happened to him is uniquely heinous or inconsistent with newly invented British values. Right but its 2023, should they be allowed to discriminate based on those things now? I'm not sure why you would defend that. 1 minute ago, Gaston de Foix said: To answer your question, Coutts would never allow Jeremy Corbyn to open an account (nor would Corbyn ever try to, admittedly) or a Just Stop Oil protester or Gordon Brown. It's useful for everyone involved in this episode to pretend its not true, but it is. They have no obligation to accept or continue a customer. You are missing the point, they couldn't decline a customer because they went on a Just Stop Oil protest or didn't like Israel, the FCA would come down on them like a ton of bricks. If someone fit the stated criteria for a customer but didn't match other protected characteristics, like race then they can't just refuse. It's not just about Coutts either, what if the same principle was applied to all other banks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 49 minutes ago, Maltaran said: That’s completely irrelevant to the definition of what a private bank is Yeah, I was reading this conversation and this line of arguement made very little sense. Prince of the North 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 6 minutes ago, Heartofice said: You are missing the point, they couldn't decline a customer because they went on a Just Stop Oil protest or didn't like Israel, the FCA would come down on them like a ton of bricks. If someone fit the stated criteria for a customer but didn't match other protected characteristics, like race then they can't just refuse. It's not just about Coutts either, what if the same principle was applied to all other banks. Good job none of that has actually happened, eh? We might as well debate the right and wrongs of Rishi Sunak's plans on how to deal with a kaiju attack in the North Sea oilfields. Ffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 2 minutes ago, Raja said: Yeah, I was reading this conversation and this line of arguement made very little sense. I'm not sure why not. The argument is that because Coutts is a 'private' company, it can do what it wants. The problem there is that its a bank and is highly regulated and there are rules as to how a bank can discriminate against. As well as that its 40% owned by the public, so it's not entirely independent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 1 minute ago, Heartofice said: I'm not sure why not. The argument is that because Coutts is a 'private' company, it can do what it wants. The problem there is that its a bank and is highly regulated and there are rules as to how a bank can discriminate against. As well as that its 40% owned by the public, so it's not entirely independent. Hmn, I wonder how majority ownership works... /s Week 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltaran Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 15 minutes ago, Heartofice said: I'm not sure why not. The argument is that because Coutts is a 'private' company, it can do what it wants. The problem there is that its a bank and is highly regulated and there are rules as to how a bank can discriminate against. As well as that its 40% owned by the public, so it's not entirely independent. No, the argument was that it is a private bank, which is a term that has nothing to do with its ownership structure and instead means that it only deals with high net worth individuals, as opposed to a retail bank which is your regular high street bank like Barclays or Lloyds. Therefore if Farage is no longer a HNW individual then they can close his account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 1 minute ago, Maltaran said: Therefore if Farage is no longer a HNW individual then they can close his account. Sigh.. except Coutts have been caught saying that they closed Farage's accounts for political reasons. Jesus wept, keep up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltaran Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 13 minutes ago, Heartofice said: Sigh.. except Coutts have been caught saying that they closed Farage's accounts for political reasons. Jesus wept, keep up! I get that’s what Farage and his supporters are saying, but you seemed to be under the impression that “private bank” meant “a bank that is privately owned” so I was trying to explain what it actually means. Prince of the North 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 4 minutes ago, Maltaran said: I get that’s what Farage and his supporters are saying, but you seemed to be under the impression that “private bank” meant “a bank that is privately owned” so I was trying to explain what it actually means. When people refer to private bank in reference to coutts they usually mean it in the context that it is privately owned, therefore can do what it wants. So I disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 (edited) Professor Xavier has entered the chat. Edited July 20, 2023 by Spockydog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts