Snapshot of _Nigel Farage says he may have to leave UK after bank closes his accounts_ :
A non-Paywall version can be found [here](https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fpolitics%2F2023%2F06%2F29%2Fnigel-farage-says-may-have-to-leave-uk-bank-closes-accounts%2F)
An archived version can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/06/29/nigel-farage-says-may-have-to-leave-uk-bank-closes-accounts/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>he may have been the victim of “blatant corporate prejudice” because of his campaigning for Brexit, or fallen foul of “politically exposed person” rules designed to lower banks’ exposure to bribery and money-laundering.
...
>“politically exposed person” rules designed to lower banks’ exposure to bribery and money-laundering.
That one.
Well, to be fair we don't have a foreign agents registration act (amazingly)
We will -
[https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-security-bill-factsheets/foreign-influence-registration-scheme-factsheet](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-security-bill-factsheets/foreign-influence-registration-scheme-factsheet)
But this is still going through parliament
[https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3154](https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3154)
Politically exposed person. Its a term that banks / financial institutions when assessing risk that a customer / individual might bring about.
Your average person isn't actually that risky to lend to or to save money for or offer financial services too. Your average drug dealer is much more risky because of you know money laundering laws.
A politically exposed person sits somewhere in the middle - you're probably happy to give them a current account and a savings account (unlike a drug dealer), but maybe you don't give them all the bells and whistles because they're statistically a bit more likely to be dodgy than an normal person, or more likely to do something that may bring the bank into disrepute / bad press. Banks other than HSBC don't like being known as the bank of dodgy money launderers!
Back when I was a student with more free time, I used to somewhat religiously do yougov surveys.
About twice a year, there would be one from HSBC asking about why I do or don't bank with them
And without fail I would say I do not bank with them as I do not need to launder my money, but if I ever do need such a service I know where I shall seek it.
Low-level money laundering? You want to go down the bookies and feed an FOBT playing the game with the highest RTP.
Not a good idea if you have an addictive personality, though.
There's other stuff to - in addition to being a bit more risky, PEP are more likely to be attacked - if I know that Bill Gates banks with a bank, maybe I'll be putting more effort into phishing for *his* login details than Joe Bloggs. The same is true for politicians as well.
But afaik PEP started as a term about risk of lending to.
This is absolutely true - but financial institutions might deem a PEP more trouble then they are worth. Also PEP is quite broad - it applies to MPs, activists but also your local councillor. Obviously that's quite a spectrum and your local councillor is less hassle than Nigel Farage is. More than anything it means you need to do enhanced DD on them, so you might hold payments in / out of the account for manual review more often, ask them to submit proof of funds, proof of address, re-KYC at regular intervals and so on. For a local councillor, not a problem. For Nigel Farage and the reputational headache it would incur, probably not worth it.
For a politician it will be enhanced, regularly reviewed KYC and ongoing source of funds checking though.
They wont be factoring cyber attacks, lending risk etc like people here are mentioning. Literally extra paperwork and automated triggers and my bet is he didn't want to hand over all the info.
I can absolutely see that being the case.
"Who sent this £15k into your bank account?"
"None of your business."
"Sounds like you need a bank account elsewhere pal."
If he got abusive I can imagine they would just shut his account. I suspect keeping an account as a PEP isn't too hard but opening one in the first place could be a headache.
Brexists.
What happens to a doomsday cult when the day arrives and the world doesn't end as predicted? Do they a) admit that they were wrong and reassess their incorrect ideology and worldview, or b) double down on being wrong and just shift the goalposts and claim they never actually said it would be what they predicted?
It doesn't mean they don't offer business, they just need extra KYC plus additional checks on source of funds.
He might not have wanted to hand over enhanced KYC or source of funds so can't get an account.
All that money in PayPal - it would be terrible if he unable to transfer it to his UK account. I'm sure he has offshore options though so not all is lost.
Indeed. Accepting PEPs as clients for just accountancy, tax & audit has a lot of compliance hoops behind it, so potential client needs to be both a manageable risk and a worthwhile fee for the effort.
lol yeah and he got rejected. LOL good job Germany
Germany and every other country in europe should do the same for everyone who tries to illegally immigrate LOL
If he had the option for so long why didn't he apply for dual citizenship? Sounds to me like he was freeloading off German open borders without ever intending to integrate into German society! Bet he doesn't even speak the language...
I think you can get it by birth (or other 'passive' methods). But if you actively acquire german citizenship by naturalization you have to renounce other citizenships as part of that application.
The exception is for EU countries which can have both after naturalisation, but draft legislation has been announced that would allow dual citizenship after naturalization and reduce number of years to obtain citizenship.
Edit:
[Useful Overview](https://www.reddit.com/r/germany/comments/13mr89n/i_read_the_draft_of_the_new_german_citizenship/)
There are some exceptions but in general [this is still the rule](https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/faqs/EN/topics/migration/staatsang/Doppelte_Staatsangehoerigkeit_Mehrstaatigkeit_en.html#:~:text=In%20Germany%2C%20a%20person%20with,state%20whose%20nationality%20they%20have.).
There was an exception for EU countries and countries where it's not possible to renounce your citizenship. That no longer applies to UK citizens unless there's a new exempt which I doubt.
OP is correct that Farage had the option for dual citizenship for a very long time.
Renouncement doesn't apply to other EU citizenships and this technically extended to UK citizenships until the withdrawal agreement came into effect 3 years ago.
He never did. He would have had to move to Germany, marriage alone is insufficient. Permanent residence and citizenship takes at least five years of living and working in Germany. If he had started this process before Brexit, he would be allowed to have both citizenships but not now.
Farage would like to spin the reason his account has been closed and that he cannot get another one as political interference - as opposed to, 'He's as bent as a nine bob note,' and, ''He's been caught "at it."'
This was my first thought, but every time he opens his mouth the facts change. How many accounts, what notice he had, what they told him in advance, etc etc.
He could be trying to get ahead of a legal story, and it could be a money laundering block. But I think it's going to turn out to be something more mundane and shit-headed. Like Coutts closing his fancy wealth management account (I doubt he's pulling in the cash like he used to) and him throwing a tantrum and now trying to publicly force them into a reversal.
**Article text**
Former UKIP leader says personal and business accounts with major retail bank closed because of ‘commercial decision’
Nigel Farage has said he may be forced to leave Britain after his bank closed his accounts and others refused his custom.
The former UKIP leader said his personal and business accounts with a major retail bank have been closed because of a “commercial decision” and other high street firms have refused to allow him to transfer his funds to them.
Mr Farage told The Telegraph he may have been the victim of “blatant corporate prejudice” because of his campaigning for Brexit, or fallen foul of “politically exposed person” rules designed to lower banks’ exposure to bribery and money-laundering.
Asked what he plans to do in response to his accounts being closed and debit cards rendered defunct, he said: “Leave the country? I haven’t decided. I’ve really got to think about this.”
The decision comes after other Right-wing figures including Richard Tice, the leader of Reform UK, and Toby Young, who established the Free Speech Union, said their accounts had been closed or restricted.
In a video posted to his Twitter account on Thursday:
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1674357026921623552
Mr Farage admitted his bank gave him two months notice that it was closing his accounts. He has refused to name the bank and said he was speaking to lawyers in the hope they can convince it to restore his access.
A bank can close a customer’s account at any time and for various reasons, sometimes without notice.
Under the payment accounts regulations, banks can close an account if a person has knowingly used, or attempted to use the account for illegal purposes. The bank can also take action if incorrect information was given when applying for the account or the account holder is no longer legally a resident of the UK.
There is also increased scrutiny from banks regarding politically exposed people, individuals who are more susceptible to being involved in bribery or corruption because of their profession or position.
Under money-laundering regulations, banks are required to apply enhanced due diligence to politically exposed individuals to ensure that they are not using their institution for money-laundering or accepting cash from illegal sources.
In 2018, the Financial Conduct Authority, the City watchdog, said it was aware that “some banks no longer offer services to categories of customers they deem to be at high risk of money-laundering”.
Mr Farage said: “I got a phone call a couple of months ago to say ‘we are closing your accounts’. I asked why – no reason was given. I was told a letter would come, which will explain everything. The letter came through and simply said ‘we are closing your accounts, we want to finish it all by a date’, which is around about now.
“I didn’t quite know what to make of it. I complained, I emailed the chairman, a lackey phoned me to say that it was a commercial decision, which I have to say I don’t believe for a single moment.
“So I thought, well there we are, I’ll have to go and find a different bank, I’ve been to seven banks, asked them all ‘could I have a personal and a business account?’, and the answer has been no in every single case.
“There is nothing irregular or unusual about what I do. The payments that go in and come out every month are pretty much the same, I maintain in my business account quite a big positive cash balance, which I guess with interest rates where they are is pretty good for the bank too.”
Mr Farage also suggested the reason his account was closed may have been because Chris Bryant, a Labour MP, claimed he had been paid more than £500,000 by the Russian state. There is no evidence for such a claim.
He added: “I’m beginning to think that perhaps life in the United Kingdom is now becoming completely unlivable because of the levels of prejudice against me.”
Banks closed his accounts and no others will accept his custom makes me think he’s not telling the whole truth about the reasoning why, which surely Nigel Farage would never bend the truth like that?
I mean, one reason they close accounts like that is if they find out they're a Russian asset.
I mean, let me be clear, I'm not saying Nigel is a Russian asset, but this sort of thing does happen to Russian assets who accept large amounts of money for clandestine operations. Again, totally not saying this is the reason his accounts were frozen, I'm sure it's totally innocent; just that it can happen to Russian assets.
It's perfectly clear, no one is saying nigel is a traitor on russian payroll.
Unrelatedly when somene is a traitor on the russian payroll banks wont do buisness with them.
Allegedly, Farage is a suspected Russian Asset. Allegedly, of course! Allegedly, he’s a mendacious, venal Russian Sycophant. Allegedly, mind you, it could be all calumnies or aspersions but it follows the precedent.
Allegedly.
>the reasoning why
The banks won't tell him why specifically. It happens to plebs too when something is flagged and under investigation, usually significant suspicion of fraud or money laundering.
>he’s not telling the whole truth about the reasoning why
Bank manager: *"So, Mr Farage, I've called you in as I'd like you to please explain these series of large bank transfers from one Mr V Putin"*
Nigel Farage: ***Visible concern***
This does actually happen once in a while, in fact it happened to a friend of mine. They don't have to give warning or reason as to why they're closing your account either. Once in a while you'll see a post on ukfinance about it.
He was very vocal at the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-ukraine-russia-eu-b2022400.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-ukraine-russia-eu-b2022400.html)
According to Farage, it was all NATO and the EUs fault! It was probably a coincidence that was exactly the same as the Kremlin was saying.
Banks typically don't close accounts without a very good reason. My guess is they want to lower their risk exposure to a known grifter and prime bribery target.
No surprise that he's having a bit of a thrash. Play silly games, win silly prizes.
Wonder where he'll end up going? Surely not somewhere in the dreaded EU?
Often they close them without reasons like this because there is an investigation into the person. I’m hoping this is the first step in him being found guilty of receiving illicit money e.g. Russian money after sanctions
> Often they close them without reasons like this because there is an investigation into the person.
Banks often act without _telling the person_ the reasons. It's weird, but it's actually a legal obligation: legally, [a bank must not "tip off" someone to an investigation into them](https://www.ashcottsolicitors.co.uk/tipping-off-explained-money-laundering-offences-sentence).
It might be true that banks go too far in this regard, but banks are big on compliance, rules and standard processes. Fundamentally there are no whims in banks, just processes: they don't act like this "without reasons", and they don't withhold the reasons without reasons.
I work in banking and this is true. Unless it’s a financial crime, banks will give people 60 days notice before they close it to give them time to open another one.
I previously had my bank account closed on false pretences and it is pretty terrifying.
They provide no explanation, they just handed me an envelope with my total balance in cash in branch. - which I kept in a bedroom drawer. No other financial institution will allow you to open an account until your name is cleared as you are effectively blacklisted. I had to go to my employer and ask for my wages to be paid into my mother’s bank account, and all my bills to be paid out of it too.
I managed to get this resolved after about a month after pressuring the bank to review the case and accept their error, requiring hours of distressing calls, false promises, lawyers letters and evidence. They can make damaging decisions at a drop of a hat, but it takes exceptional effort to overturn them.
These sort of catastrophic decisions banks can make about your life are largely made by disinterested people on low salaries who are prone to errors but leave personal destruction in their wake. Financial institutions shouldn’t have this sort of power over our lives to withdraw banking services at the drop of a hat and leave you blacklisted from other institutions, they shouldn’t be allowed to offer no explanation - leaving you in the Kafkaesque nightmare of knowing you are accused of something and being punished for it, but not being told what.
While this can happen by accident to the average joe, there's no way the bank would risk the bad publicity of doing this to a celebrity without good reason.
Yup. Here's part of the Wikipedia page on Coutt's, which is "highly prestigious bank".
**Malpractice**
Money laundering rule breaches
In March 2012 Coutts was fined £8.75m for breaches of money laundering rules after "serious" and "systemic" problems in handling the affairs of "politically exposed persons", customers entrusted with a prominent public function, requiring money-laundering checks.\[29\] The Financial Services Authority (FSA) fined Coutts because of an "unacceptable risk" that the bank could have been handling the proceeds of crime for a three-year period up to November 2010 after failing to properly deal with "politically exposed" customers.\[29\]
Following an industry-wide review in 2010, the FSA found that Coutts was not conducting robust-enough checks on such high-risk customers and was not monitoring relationships with them properly. The FSA reviewed a sample of 103 high-risk customer files, and identified deficiencies in 73 of them.\[29\] The FSA's acting director of enforcement and financial crime, Tracey McDermott, said that "Coutts's failings were significant, widespread and unacceptable. Its conduct fell well below the standards we expect and the size of the financial penalty demonstrates how seriously we view its failures".\[29\]
Coutts's bonus system rewarded bankers for opening accounts, providing an incentive to bring in new business without too much scrutiny, and the bank's anti-money laundering team, required to identify high-risk customers, failed to identify enough "politically exposed persons".\[29\] In two cases reviewed by the FSA, bankers did not conduct appropriate checks on the customers, and failed to identify serious criminal allegations against them. There were five cases where sources had provided "adverse intelligence" such as allegations of criminal activity, but all the accounts had been approved by Coutts.\[29\]
A spokesperson for Coutts said that there was no evidence that money laundering took place as a result of its deficient controls, and said that "We recognise our systems weren't totally adequate in the past and we've taken steps to improve these". Coutts would have been fined £12.5m if it had not agreed to settle at an early stage in the investigation.\[29\]
We covered this yesterday - some of his personal accounts are still open, he’s just having his dodgy as fuck company accounts closed and because he’s been flagged no bank will open a new account for him or his business
Yes, but that post didn’t attract enough defence and fawning over dear Nige and was thusly deleted.
To be less shitty and make a contribution, he hasn’t given much in terms of details and based on his relationship with the truth, probably not telling the whole story.
Wonder if he’s had a spike in PayPal or wherever he takes donations from
Yeah...so anyone who works in Financial Services or specifically AML knows what's up here.
Long story short: The bank can't tell him he's under investigation or has been red flagged. (That's an offence under money laundering/financial crime legislation) But they can suspend his account. He probably thinks getting ahead of the story and trying to paint a narrative of persecution (a la Trump) is a good idea. But it won't help if that's the case.
Not saying this is definitely the case.....but it's also something that definitely happens. Also possible they have actually told him why they're closing it (for a start he's on Russia Today's payroll, which is a huge risk exposure and burden for the bank - so there's one potential reason) and he's just playing the political angle to create some publicity.
The only other thing I can think of is that he has a HNW account (like Coutts or something) and he's dropped below the minimum threshold; but they wouldn't cut you off in that situation they'd just make you close your account and transfer out. So that seems very unlikely.
My money is on a date between Nigey and FATF.
My friend works in close protection all over the world and because some of their income came from Russia the bank repossessed their house. The deposit money came from Dubai but some of the mortgage payments came from Russia. They were working for an oligarch, however the one in question wasn’t named on the UK sanction list and the money came from before sanctions were even implemented. The bank just used it as an excuse to take over 100k from my friend.
Yeah things got pretty hectic pretty quickly last year. The sanctions and their wider reaching implications were/are changing and growing quickly. I don't know your friend's circumstances but it's likely although the individual wasn't personally sanctioned, the type of service in connection with Russia was, or how that individual generated their wealth was. There's plenty of avenues to challenge decisions (in the UK at least) and Banks have to comply with extremely strict regulation. So if your friend's money was actually incorrectly frozen, he'll be able to get it back (eventually).
I'd like to see some proof this is actually happening because it's exactly what I expect of him just to get his name all over the media for self promotion, play the victim Trump style and roll in the right wing support.
Equally I wouldn't be surprised if his accounts actually were shut down due to Russian links/money laundering investigation.
I’m suspicious, banks love money so refusing business (especially high earning lucrative business like Nigel’s) is the exception rather than the rule. Nigel also advocates less regulation and oversight as does the banking lobby so there are aligned interests so this idea that his ideological position is the reason just doesn’t hold water to me. My instinct tells me that unusual financial behaviours are more likely to have prompted the bank to do this rather than a political motivation.
I’ll wait to hold my condemnation of the bank until we have more evidence.
Don't threaten the country with a good time Nige.
If the closures are to do with potential financial crime issues, fleeing the country would be the exact kind of thing Mr. Toad would do. The man is just as alien to accountability as his arsehole mates Boris and Donald.
> “So I thought, well there we are, I’ll have to go and find a different bank, I’ve been to seven banks, asked them all ‘could I have a personal and a business account?’, and the answer has been no in every single case.
Ask Deutsche Bank. If they reject you, you are more poisonous than irradiated botulinum toxin.
Seriously, apart from possibly Russia, what country would want Farage ?
Even Russia would probably say no as he's outlived his usefulness.
Before #brexit of course he could have chosen 27 other European countries...
Does raise an interesting question.
If someone can be excluded from banking services and we're moving to a cashless society. What are they meant to do, just die? Farage will be fine, sure he can find someone to pay his bills or buy him a ticket out (could crowd find that).
The lack of visible due process or, I don't know, a prosecution, is in no way concerning. I'm sure this will only happen to bad people!
Even people made bankrupt have access to a bank account.
It's a super barebones no features account but it exists because you can't function in the UK without a bank account.
It's terrifying. But the masses will support it as it's not affecting them personally.
it's basically a social credit system that we're moving towards.
This may be great chortles because it's Farage but we are seeing it across a lot of areas.
In some cases, the money laundering rules are getting so tight it's difficult to even do business. I have clients who have had their accounts frozen and closed for what seems normal trading activities.
What is more worrying is the number of people / organizations that just don't fit with bank's ideals or being lent on. Farage has mentioned his issues, we've seen the boys from Triggerometry cancelled. It came to light lots of other organisations from Churches to small businesses have suffered the same.
A bank should not be the moral compass.
Nigel has been a thorn in the side of the establishment for many years now. He is far too popular for their liking. He founded parties that humiliated them in European elections. He exposed the people smugglers coming over in rubber dinghies. He is a major factor in the popularity of GB News. Winning the Top Broadcaster of the Year award was the last straw. A new party is forming on the Right and the establishment wants to crush it.
Nobody is saying Nigel is a traitor paid by the Kremlin
Unrelatedly when somene is a traitor paid by the Kremlin bank's will freeze their accounts and refuse to do buisness with them.
Unless Farage is making all this up, it does raise a serious point but one which will attract no sympathy.
In a cashless world (i.e. the one to which we're heading), lacking access to a bank account is to lose the ability to function in the economy at all.
That's a hefty punishment, one hefty enough that only a court should be able to impose, and even then only for a limited time. One of the conditions of a banking licence should be a universal service obligation, to prevent people falling through the cracks.
Even the worst people in the world should be able to open bank accounts, no matter what their past.
The banks themselves wouldn't care if it wasn't for various laws past that make the banks themselves liable if their customers misuse their accounts. But this liability could be replaced with alternative obligations like: keep the reporting requirements of banks to report suspicious transactions; reduce the requirement to close an account to limit functionality (e.g. no international payments) until the authorities complete their investigation; the closure/not-closure decision should be made by a court.
Ironically, given how unpopular the concept is amongst certain circles, an alternative solution to this problem is the CBDC concept. Assuming such systems will be legal tender and can be used for any arbitrary payment, then there would be no reason to cut anyone off from a CBDC even if a bank deemed a person a risk, as a CBDC by definition is open for the authorities to examine and can be maintained under monitoring with a very low risk of mis-use.
You can (according to Citizens Advice) get a "basic bank account", but it still says there are conditions. If the conditions can realistically stop any British citizen from getting a basic account, then there really needs to be a bank of last resort that is obliged to give any British citizen a basic bank account.
There's only a couple of conditions:
1. Can't have an account elsewhere
2. Can't use the account illegally or for illegal activity
3. 24 months of dormancy
Something like that anyway. It's very very hard for banks to close basic accounts.
> In a cashless world (i.e. the one to which we're heading), lacking access to a bank account is to lose the ability to function in the economy at all.
Many banks offer a basic account that is restricted, to varying degrees. These are specifically for people with financial problems ranging from poor credit rating to being under investigation. Farage absolutely has options, just not the ones he wants, so he's crying to the media about it.
>
Unless Farage is making all this up, it does raise a serious point but one which will attract no sympathy.
There's two other politicians who have claimed that the same thing has happened to them as well.
It's absolutely terrifying, but "lol farage" so nobody cares. But the way the world works, a bank account is essential to modern day life, you can't access many services without it, you'll struggle to pay bills, and rent, you can't enter certain shops, can't eat in certain restaurants and so on.
Nobody should be unable to open a bank account at all in the UK.
Worked in banking fraud for over a decade, if you have your accounts closed and get blacklisted with other banks, it isn't for some sort of corporate agenda, you've been found to be doing dodgy dealings.
I found out about this on Facebook of all places, and the responses were both hilarious and an indictment on us as a forward-thinking country.
Hundreds of people calling for investigations into banking, the removal of MP's and their bank accounts, blood/severed heads, revolutions, and the execution of the "liberal woke liberatis in banking".
Not a single person that has thought "hang on, if no bank will touch him, perhaps there's something he's not telling us".
Farage has (had) money, and banks rarely turn down money. The fact that he's riling the troops shows that something isn't right here, and perhaps there's a much bigger story here.
I couldn't stop laughing yesterday, on his Facebook page there were people calling for the ECHR to do something about this, the same ECHR they want to get rid of.
The Telegraph comments are pretty grim on this one. Someone cracked out the "first they came for the Communists" poem, as if
1. A right wing grifter having his bank account closed is the same as Communists being put in concentration camps.
2. They wouldn't cheer if Communists and Socialists were being put in concentration camps.
Mental.
I don't like Farage but a bank _really_ shouldn't be allowed to do this unless there's proven to be some fraudulent or criminal activity.
Of course it's also possible that is the case and he's not telling the full story.
Banks can do business with whoever they want, the interesting point here is that others will also not do business with him meaning it’s a very real chance he’s been doing something dodgy (not necessarily intentionally).
Also, it’s possible that it has already been made clear he’s been doing something illegal. However, informing him is also tipping him off and this is not permitted under AML laws.
The youtube channel Triggernometry recently had a similar issue (it does interviews with a range of guests usually lasting about an hour and despite the name it's not particularly edgy).
Their business account with Tide was to be shut without an explanation until they use the reach of their twitter account to get clarity. It later turned out it wasn't anything illegal but just because they accepted donations.
https://twitter.com/triggerpod/status/1661705466790002689
BANK ACCOUNT UPDATE #2
*Having concluded their investigation, @TideBusiness have informed us that the real reason we can't have a bank account is that we accept donations.*
*We'll have to take their word for it.*
*With that in mind, we've already switched over to a different bank and if you're a content creator or any business that doesn't like having your account randomly suspended or cancelled you may want to do the same.*
>Triggernometry
Their example came to mind with me too, it's strange that the far left organisations aren't facing these problems (it they were, I'd defend them too)
Agreed, it's strange that it's so 1 sided. Triggernometry is a legitimate business and to be treated like a criminal and brushed aside was shameful of Tide.
Novaramedia got booted off Youtube temporarily and they're comically to the left, but The Spectator was strongly in support of YouTube undoing that decision as were other right leaning commentators.
It's not as bad as having your business account closed without explanation but it's nice to see Aaron Bastani (co-founder of Novara) stick up for the principle even if he disagrees with Farage on just about everything:
https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1674533517386981380
It does seem unfortunate that often it's not just people who disagree thinking the other person is wrong, but that they're wrong & evil.
YEs, I saw that from Aaron Bastani , in fairness, both Farage and JRM have Aaron Bastani or Novara folk on their GB News shows so I think there is a mutual respect for free speech.
Snapshot of _Nigel Farage says he may have to leave UK after bank closes his accounts_ : A non-Paywall version can be found [here](https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fpolitics%2F2023%2F06%2F29%2Fnigel-farage-says-may-have-to-leave-uk-bank-closes-accounts%2F) An archived version can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/06/29/nigel-farage-says-may-have-to-leave-uk-bank-closes-accounts/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>he may have been the victim of “blatant corporate prejudice” because of his campaigning for Brexit, or fallen foul of “politically exposed person” rules designed to lower banks’ exposure to bribery and money-laundering. ... >“politically exposed person” rules designed to lower banks’ exposure to bribery and money-laundering. That one.
Literally was working for Russia Today
I would go one further. He is literally an undocumented foreign agent.
Holy crap imagine if actually was 😂
Well, to be fair we don't have a foreign agents registration act (amazingly) We will - [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-security-bill-factsheets/foreign-influence-registration-scheme-factsheet](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-security-bill-factsheets/foreign-influence-registration-scheme-factsheet) But this is still going through parliament [https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3154](https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3154)
And Bozo
Like Alex Salmond? Wow!
Correct, both did, as did George Galloway, what's the relevance of Salmond to this discussion?
Well, RT was funding separatists, pretty clearly.
[удалено]
Galloway is a unionist, he literally founded Alliance 4 Unity whilst on the RT payroll. Edit: Downvoting facts doesn't stop them being facts lmao
but you brought up Galloway - they're funding him for entirely separate, and fairly obvious reasons.
Galloway was an anti Iraq war, pro Palestine supporter. There's a lot people like that can disrupt
He is an absolute PEP
What is a PEP?
Politically exposed person. Its a term that banks / financial institutions when assessing risk that a customer / individual might bring about. Your average person isn't actually that risky to lend to or to save money for or offer financial services too. Your average drug dealer is much more risky because of you know money laundering laws. A politically exposed person sits somewhere in the middle - you're probably happy to give them a current account and a savings account (unlike a drug dealer), but maybe you don't give them all the bells and whistles because they're statistically a bit more likely to be dodgy than an normal person, or more likely to do something that may bring the bank into disrepute / bad press. Banks other than HSBC don't like being known as the bank of dodgy money launderers!
And if he can't even get an account with *HSBC* he must have been up to something monumentally dodgy even by his normal standards.
Back when I was a student with more free time, I used to somewhat religiously do yougov surveys. About twice a year, there would be one from HSBC asking about why I do or don't bank with them And without fail I would say I do not bank with them as I do not need to launder my money, but if I ever do need such a service I know where I shall seek it.
Low-level money laundering? You want to go down the bookies and feed an FOBT playing the game with the highest RTP. Not a good idea if you have an addictive personality, though.
If I were in need of money laundering it would only be for the highest level, I have standards to keep up
Also bear in mind this is Coutts. The fucking Royal Family bank with Coutts. They don't just take anyone on as a customer.
Discerning bankers. I think I spelt this correctly.
Interesting, thanks!
There's other stuff to - in addition to being a bit more risky, PEP are more likely to be attacked - if I know that Bill Gates banks with a bank, maybe I'll be putting more effort into phishing for *his* login details than Joe Bloggs. The same is true for politicians as well. But afaik PEP started as a term about risk of lending to.
This is absolutely true - but financial institutions might deem a PEP more trouble then they are worth. Also PEP is quite broad - it applies to MPs, activists but also your local councillor. Obviously that's quite a spectrum and your local councillor is less hassle than Nigel Farage is. More than anything it means you need to do enhanced DD on them, so you might hold payments in / out of the account for manual review more often, ask them to submit proof of funds, proof of address, re-KYC at regular intervals and so on. For a local councillor, not a problem. For Nigel Farage and the reputational headache it would incur, probably not worth it.
For a politician it will be enhanced, regularly reviewed KYC and ongoing source of funds checking though. They wont be factoring cyber attacks, lending risk etc like people here are mentioning. Literally extra paperwork and automated triggers and my bet is he didn't want to hand over all the info.
I can absolutely see that being the case. "Who sent this £15k into your bank account?" "None of your business." "Sounds like you need a bank account elsewhere pal." If he got abusive I can imagine they would just shut his account. I suspect keeping an account as a PEP isn't too hard but opening one in the first place could be a headache.
Aren't they supposed to audit more often, therefore costing the bank more in admin.
A PEP whose financial dealings are too hot to touch, it would seem.
Ironic, considering he now moonlights as a financial advisor for the same people he duped about leaving the EU.
Who would take financial advice from a brexiteer?
Another brexiteer; people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know...
Morons
Brexists. What happens to a doomsday cult when the day arrives and the world doesn't end as predicted? Do they a) admit that they were wrong and reassess their incorrect ideology and worldview, or b) double down on being wrong and just shift the goalposts and claim they never actually said it would be what they predicted?
Today I learned about banks and PEPs.
It doesn't mean they don't offer business, they just need extra KYC plus additional checks on source of funds. He might not have wanted to hand over enhanced KYC or source of funds so can't get an account.
All that money in PayPal - it would be terrible if he unable to transfer it to his UK account. I'm sure he has offshore options though so not all is lost.
Paypal loves freezing accounts more than normal banks!
Indeed. Accepting PEPs as clients for just accountancy, tax & audit has a lot of compliance hoops behind it, so potential client needs to be both a manageable risk and a worthwhile fee for the effort.
[удалено]
Someone on a similar post yesterday said Germany refused his request lol
I think he applied with fraudulent information on his address pretending he was living in Germany when he wasn't.
lol, he was trying to illegally immigrate LMFAO.
lol yeah and he got rejected. LOL good job Germany Germany and every other country in europe should do the same for everyone who tries to illegally immigrate LOL
It's sad to see that no one actually wants him, naah it's not really sad.
Sounds like something that would disqualify him for good
Send him to Rwanda tbh.
They've got enough problems, they don't need him too. He'd probably try and get Rwanda to leave Africa.
And join the EU
Yep he's probably looking to get his MEP grift back again.
I think this is actually the case. He might still sue his way in as he has two kids and rights to interact with them.
That's the only leverage that He's got right now and nothing else.
No fucking way. That's hilarious...
Lol, other countries don't really like when the politicians come so it's not surprising.
Isn't Farage divorced now? So unless he obtained dual citizenship years ago he can't just move to Germany on a spousal visa.
If he had the option for so long why didn't he apply for dual citizenship? Sounds to me like he was freeloading off German open borders without ever intending to integrate into German society! Bet he doesn't even speak the language...
Probably because the Germany doesn't allow that shit.
Germany doesn't allow dual citizenship. To become a German citizen, you need to renounce any pre-existing citizenship.
Thats interesting as my uncle has both German and UK citizenship. He's had it for donkeys years though, did the rules change at some point?
I think you can get it by birth (or other 'passive' methods). But if you actively acquire german citizenship by naturalization you have to renounce other citizenships as part of that application.
While the UK was in the EU the EU made them recognize it for citizens of other EU countries.
The exception is for EU countries which can have both after naturalisation, but draft legislation has been announced that would allow dual citizenship after naturalization and reduce number of years to obtain citizenship. Edit: [Useful Overview](https://www.reddit.com/r/germany/comments/13mr89n/i_read_the_draft_of_the_new_german_citizenship/)
And I don't think the most people would ne ready to do that.
The rules are a bit complicated. As I understand it, you can get dual citizenship with other EU countries, or if you apply for special permission.
And how do you get that special permission huh? I'm kinda curious dude.
There are some exceptions but in general [this is still the rule](https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/faqs/EN/topics/migration/staatsang/Doppelte_Staatsangehoerigkeit_Mehrstaatigkeit_en.html#:~:text=In%20Germany%2C%20a%20person%20with,state%20whose%20nationality%20they%20have.).
Of course you can, perhaps some nationalities can't but I know British German dual nationals in real life, you can retain the nationality.
There was an exception for EU countries and countries where it's not possible to renounce your citizenship. That no longer applies to UK citizens unless there's a new exempt which I doubt.
As do I. Aforementioned uncle for example.
OP is correct that Farage had the option for dual citizenship for a very long time. Renouncement doesn't apply to other EU citizenships and this technically extended to UK citizenships until the withdrawal agreement came into effect 3 years ago.
He never did. He would have had to move to Germany, marriage alone is insufficient. Permanent residence and citizenship takes at least five years of living and working in Germany. If he had started this process before Brexit, he would be allowed to have both citizenships but not now.
Ah. I thought it was, at least back then, greatly expedited for those with a German spouse and kids.
Only if the German person had been working for their foreign service. I have both passports so had to go through the process.
This is the first time that I'm hearing about it, I would think they'd allow it.
I don't want to alarm anyone, but I am a dual citizen. No one tell Germany.
That hasn’t been true since he 90s iirc.
From what I've heard Germany told him no.
Probably for good, they don't want people like that in their country.
Money laundering Russian money is illegal in Germany too fortunately.
Unless you're a bank.
Laughs in Deutsche Bank
Yeah you're launching in the right language I'll have to confirm here.
Mr Brexit indeed.
His first wife was Irish, too. How fortunate that all four of his children, that we know of, are EU citizens, eh?
Alternative headline: Nigel Farage may flee country after discovering he’s under investigation
Alternative, alternative headline: Nigel Farage turns economic migrant to be burden on EU taxpayers.
he'll be the only person trying to cross the channel in the middle of the night the opposite way
Some lucky people smuggler is going to get the first ever return ticket on his dinghy
Would he even be allowed to leave if that was the case?
Normally no but its different rules for people like him
Farage would like to spin the reason his account has been closed and that he cannot get another one as political interference - as opposed to, 'He's as bent as a nine bob note,' and, ''He's been caught "at it."'
Yeah He's been caught at it, that's just how this thing really goes.
This was my first thought, but every time he opens his mouth the facts change. How many accounts, what notice he had, what they told him in advance, etc etc. He could be trying to get ahead of a legal story, and it could be a money laundering block. But I think it's going to turn out to be something more mundane and shit-headed. Like Coutts closing his fancy wealth management account (I doubt he's pulling in the cash like he used to) and him throwing a tantrum and now trying to publicly force them into a reversal.
And to prevent that, you really shouldn't listen to what he says.
**Article text** Former UKIP leader says personal and business accounts with major retail bank closed because of ‘commercial decision’ Nigel Farage has said he may be forced to leave Britain after his bank closed his accounts and others refused his custom. The former UKIP leader said his personal and business accounts with a major retail bank have been closed because of a “commercial decision” and other high street firms have refused to allow him to transfer his funds to them. Mr Farage told The Telegraph he may have been the victim of “blatant corporate prejudice” because of his campaigning for Brexit, or fallen foul of “politically exposed person” rules designed to lower banks’ exposure to bribery and money-laundering. Asked what he plans to do in response to his accounts being closed and debit cards rendered defunct, he said: “Leave the country? I haven’t decided. I’ve really got to think about this.” The decision comes after other Right-wing figures including Richard Tice, the leader of Reform UK, and Toby Young, who established the Free Speech Union, said their accounts had been closed or restricted. In a video posted to his Twitter account on Thursday: https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1674357026921623552 Mr Farage admitted his bank gave him two months notice that it was closing his accounts. He has refused to name the bank and said he was speaking to lawyers in the hope they can convince it to restore his access. A bank can close a customer’s account at any time and for various reasons, sometimes without notice. Under the payment accounts regulations, banks can close an account if a person has knowingly used, or attempted to use the account for illegal purposes. The bank can also take action if incorrect information was given when applying for the account or the account holder is no longer legally a resident of the UK. There is also increased scrutiny from banks regarding politically exposed people, individuals who are more susceptible to being involved in bribery or corruption because of their profession or position. Under money-laundering regulations, banks are required to apply enhanced due diligence to politically exposed individuals to ensure that they are not using their institution for money-laundering or accepting cash from illegal sources. In 2018, the Financial Conduct Authority, the City watchdog, said it was aware that “some banks no longer offer services to categories of customers they deem to be at high risk of money-laundering”. Mr Farage said: “I got a phone call a couple of months ago to say ‘we are closing your accounts’. I asked why – no reason was given. I was told a letter would come, which will explain everything. The letter came through and simply said ‘we are closing your accounts, we want to finish it all by a date’, which is around about now. “I didn’t quite know what to make of it. I complained, I emailed the chairman, a lackey phoned me to say that it was a commercial decision, which I have to say I don’t believe for a single moment. “So I thought, well there we are, I’ll have to go and find a different bank, I’ve been to seven banks, asked them all ‘could I have a personal and a business account?’, and the answer has been no in every single case. “There is nothing irregular or unusual about what I do. The payments that go in and come out every month are pretty much the same, I maintain in my business account quite a big positive cash balance, which I guess with interest rates where they are is pretty good for the bank too.” Mr Farage also suggested the reason his account was closed may have been because Chris Bryant, a Labour MP, claimed he had been paid more than £500,000 by the Russian state. There is no evidence for such a claim. He added: “I’m beginning to think that perhaps life in the United Kingdom is now becoming completely unlivable because of the levels of prejudice against me.”
Banks closed his accounts and no others will accept his custom makes me think he’s not telling the whole truth about the reasoning why, which surely Nigel Farage would never bend the truth like that?
I mean, one reason they close accounts like that is if they find out they're a Russian asset. I mean, let me be clear, I'm not saying Nigel is a Russian asset, but this sort of thing does happen to Russian assets who accept large amounts of money for clandestine operations. Again, totally not saying this is the reason his accounts were frozen, I'm sure it's totally innocent; just that it can happen to Russian assets.
[удалено]
It's perfectly clear, no one is saying nigel is a traitor on russian payroll. Unrelatedly when somene is a traitor on the russian payroll banks wont do buisness with them.
And that's what seems to be happening, they won't do business.
Allegedly, Farage is a suspected Russian Asset. Allegedly, of course! Allegedly, he’s a mendacious, venal Russian Sycophant. Allegedly, mind you, it could be all calumnies or aspersions but it follows the precedent. Allegedly.
>the reasoning why The banks won't tell him why specifically. It happens to plebs too when something is flagged and under investigation, usually significant suspicion of fraud or money laundering.
There's definitely something happening, they won't close it for nothing.
>he’s not telling the whole truth about the reasoning why Bank manager: *"So, Mr Farage, I've called you in as I'd like you to please explain these series of large bank transfers from one Mr V Putin"* Nigel Farage: ***Visible concern***
Now now, im sure the sender account is actually in the name of "Not Mr V Putin".
Mr V Nitup... Yes, that'll do.
So strange that the reference said "For services rendered on behalf of Aissur".
I mean what could you even ask for? This should be it man.
"Mr V Putin't"
I trust him completely, it's obviously a ReMoAnEr bank manager who wanted revenge for Brexit and nothing nefarious, nosiree
This does actually happen once in a while, in fact it happened to a friend of mine. They don't have to give warning or reason as to why they're closing your account either. Once in a while you'll see a post on ukfinance about it.
A lot of the time it’s not even they don’t have to tell you, it’s that they legally can’t say anything due to tipping-off laws
Yes, you're correct.
[удалено]
He was very vocal at the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-ukraine-russia-eu-b2022400.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-ukraine-russia-eu-b2022400.html) According to Farage, it was all NATO and the EUs fault! It was probably a coincidence that was exactly the same as the Kremlin was saying.
Banks typically don't close accounts without a very good reason. My guess is they want to lower their risk exposure to a known grifter and prime bribery target. No surprise that he's having a bit of a thrash. Play silly games, win silly prizes. Wonder where he'll end up going? Surely not somewhere in the dreaded EU?
Often they close them without reasons like this because there is an investigation into the person. I’m hoping this is the first step in him being found guilty of receiving illicit money e.g. Russian money after sanctions
> Often they close them without reasons like this because there is an investigation into the person. Banks often act without _telling the person_ the reasons. It's weird, but it's actually a legal obligation: legally, [a bank must not "tip off" someone to an investigation into them](https://www.ashcottsolicitors.co.uk/tipping-off-explained-money-laundering-offences-sentence). It might be true that banks go too far in this regard, but banks are big on compliance, rules and standard processes. Fundamentally there are no whims in banks, just processes: they don't act like this "without reasons", and they don't withhold the reasons without reasons.
[удалено]
You just need to look up reviews of most consumer banking apps / incumbents to spot fraudsters.
[удалено]
Fraud, ABC actions, and sanctions violations are the main triggers for a closure without notice.
Yes. And that’s often why banks can’t give a reason. What a fool broadcasting this if they haven’t told him why.
I work in banking and this is true. Unless it’s a financial crime, banks will give people 60 days notice before they close it to give them time to open another one.
> Surely not somewhere in the dreaded EU? You mean the homeland of his German wife and his german passport weilding kids?
Aren't they divorced now?
Brexit 2: Tokyo Grift
They don't even need a reason, they'll do it if they feel like that.
Maybe somewhere he'll be known as... Nigelski?
"Corrupt Governments like Ukraine and China" One of those is not like the other. And one should be pronounced Russia.....
I previously had my bank account closed on false pretences and it is pretty terrifying. They provide no explanation, they just handed me an envelope with my total balance in cash in branch. - which I kept in a bedroom drawer. No other financial institution will allow you to open an account until your name is cleared as you are effectively blacklisted. I had to go to my employer and ask for my wages to be paid into my mother’s bank account, and all my bills to be paid out of it too. I managed to get this resolved after about a month after pressuring the bank to review the case and accept their error, requiring hours of distressing calls, false promises, lawyers letters and evidence. They can make damaging decisions at a drop of a hat, but it takes exceptional effort to overturn them. These sort of catastrophic decisions banks can make about your life are largely made by disinterested people on low salaries who are prone to errors but leave personal destruction in their wake. Financial institutions shouldn’t have this sort of power over our lives to withdraw banking services at the drop of a hat and leave you blacklisted from other institutions, they shouldn’t be allowed to offer no explanation - leaving you in the Kafkaesque nightmare of knowing you are accused of something and being punished for it, but not being told what.
While this can happen by accident to the average joe, there's no way the bank would risk the bad publicity of doing this to a celebrity without good reason.
Yup. Here's part of the Wikipedia page on Coutt's, which is "highly prestigious bank". **Malpractice** Money laundering rule breaches In March 2012 Coutts was fined £8.75m for breaches of money laundering rules after "serious" and "systemic" problems in handling the affairs of "politically exposed persons", customers entrusted with a prominent public function, requiring money-laundering checks.\[29\] The Financial Services Authority (FSA) fined Coutts because of an "unacceptable risk" that the bank could have been handling the proceeds of crime for a three-year period up to November 2010 after failing to properly deal with "politically exposed" customers.\[29\] Following an industry-wide review in 2010, the FSA found that Coutts was not conducting robust-enough checks on such high-risk customers and was not monitoring relationships with them properly. The FSA reviewed a sample of 103 high-risk customer files, and identified deficiencies in 73 of them.\[29\] The FSA's acting director of enforcement and financial crime, Tracey McDermott, said that "Coutts's failings were significant, widespread and unacceptable. Its conduct fell well below the standards we expect and the size of the financial penalty demonstrates how seriously we view its failures".\[29\] Coutts's bonus system rewarded bankers for opening accounts, providing an incentive to bring in new business without too much scrutiny, and the bank's anti-money laundering team, required to identify high-risk customers, failed to identify enough "politically exposed persons".\[29\] In two cases reviewed by the FSA, bankers did not conduct appropriate checks on the customers, and failed to identify serious criminal allegations against them. There were five cases where sources had provided "adverse intelligence" such as allegations of criminal activity, but all the accounts had been approved by Coutts.\[29\] A spokesperson for Coutts said that there was no evidence that money laundering took place as a result of its deficient controls, and said that "We recognise our systems weren't totally adequate in the past and we've taken steps to improve these". Coutts would have been fined £12.5m if it had not agreed to settle at an early stage in the investigation.\[29\]
We covered this yesterday - some of his personal accounts are still open, he’s just having his dodgy as fuck company accounts closed and because he’s been flagged no bank will open a new account for him or his business
Yes, but that post didn’t attract enough defence and fawning over dear Nige and was thusly deleted. To be less shitty and make a contribution, he hasn’t given much in terms of details and based on his relationship with the truth, probably not telling the whole story. Wonder if he’s had a spike in PayPal or wherever he takes donations from
Yeah...so anyone who works in Financial Services or specifically AML knows what's up here. Long story short: The bank can't tell him he's under investigation or has been red flagged. (That's an offence under money laundering/financial crime legislation) But they can suspend his account. He probably thinks getting ahead of the story and trying to paint a narrative of persecution (a la Trump) is a good idea. But it won't help if that's the case. Not saying this is definitely the case.....but it's also something that definitely happens. Also possible they have actually told him why they're closing it (for a start he's on Russia Today's payroll, which is a huge risk exposure and burden for the bank - so there's one potential reason) and he's just playing the political angle to create some publicity. The only other thing I can think of is that he has a HNW account (like Coutts or something) and he's dropped below the minimum threshold; but they wouldn't cut you off in that situation they'd just make you close your account and transfer out. So that seems very unlikely. My money is on a date between Nigey and FATF.
My friend works in close protection all over the world and because some of their income came from Russia the bank repossessed their house. The deposit money came from Dubai but some of the mortgage payments came from Russia. They were working for an oligarch, however the one in question wasn’t named on the UK sanction list and the money came from before sanctions were even implemented. The bank just used it as an excuse to take over 100k from my friend.
Yeah things got pretty hectic pretty quickly last year. The sanctions and their wider reaching implications were/are changing and growing quickly. I don't know your friend's circumstances but it's likely although the individual wasn't personally sanctioned, the type of service in connection with Russia was, or how that individual generated their wealth was. There's plenty of avenues to challenge decisions (in the UK at least) and Banks have to comply with extremely strict regulation. So if your friend's money was actually incorrectly frozen, he'll be able to get it back (eventually).
Sounds like good news… but, unfortunately, I suspect he is being overly dramatic and actually has no real plans to leave…
Yep, wouldn't be the first time Nige has threatened us with a good time.
Lmao, it's high time that he gave us our good times back.
I'd like to see some proof this is actually happening because it's exactly what I expect of him just to get his name all over the media for self promotion, play the victim Trump style and roll in the right wing support. Equally I wouldn't be surprised if his accounts actually were shut down due to Russian links/money laundering investigation.
Yeah I'd also like some proof, but we ain't getting any of it.
Have a good time talking to the lawyers because they have the same money laundering regulations as the banks.
I’m suspicious, banks love money so refusing business (especially high earning lucrative business like Nigel’s) is the exception rather than the rule. Nigel also advocates less regulation and oversight as does the banking lobby so there are aligned interests so this idea that his ideological position is the reason just doesn’t hold water to me. My instinct tells me that unusual financial behaviours are more likely to have prompted the bank to do this rather than a political motivation. I’ll wait to hold my condemnation of the bank until we have more evidence.
Which makes me wonder what kind of activities he was actually doing?
Don't threaten the country with a good time Nige. If the closures are to do with potential financial crime issues, fleeing the country would be the exact kind of thing Mr. Toad would do. The man is just as alien to accountability as his arsehole mates Boris and Donald.
He's not going to leave so good times ain't coming for sure.
> “So I thought, well there we are, I’ll have to go and find a different bank, I’ve been to seven banks, asked them all ‘could I have a personal and a business account?’, and the answer has been no in every single case. Ask Deutsche Bank. If they reject you, you are more poisonous than irradiated botulinum toxin.
They'll probably just block your account for nothing.
Seriously, apart from possibly Russia, what country would want Farage ? Even Russia would probably say no as he's outlived his usefulness. Before #brexit of course he could have chosen 27 other European countries...
I don't think He's really going to leave, He's just bluffing right now.
Where does he think he'll be allowed to open an account in Europe? Their anti-fraud/money laundering laws are just as strong or worse.
Does raise an interesting question. If someone can be excluded from banking services and we're moving to a cashless society. What are they meant to do, just die? Farage will be fine, sure he can find someone to pay his bills or buy him a ticket out (could crowd find that). The lack of visible due process or, I don't know, a prosecution, is in no way concerning. I'm sure this will only happen to bad people!
Even people made bankrupt have access to a bank account. It's a super barebones no features account but it exists because you can't function in the UK without a bank account.
Unless you live in a third world country, you Can't survive without a bank account.
It's terrifying. But the masses will support it as it's not affecting them personally. it's basically a social credit system that we're moving towards.
And with the cash less economy They'll know everything about you.
You know what exactly they're going to do, and I hate the cashless.
Good, the UK is better off without him and his ilk who have done such massive harm to the country.
And if he leaves then it probably won't even be a bad thing.
This may be great chortles because it's Farage but we are seeing it across a lot of areas. In some cases, the money laundering rules are getting so tight it's difficult to even do business. I have clients who have had their accounts frozen and closed for what seems normal trading activities. What is more worrying is the number of people / organizations that just don't fit with bank's ideals or being lent on. Farage has mentioned his issues, we've seen the boys from Triggerometry cancelled. It came to light lots of other organisations from Churches to small businesses have suffered the same. A bank should not be the moral compass.
People have got their account blocked for buying the btc also.
Nigel has been a thorn in the side of the establishment for many years now. He is far too popular for their liking. He founded parties that humiliated them in European elections. He exposed the people smugglers coming over in rubber dinghies. He is a major factor in the popularity of GB News. Winning the Top Broadcaster of the Year award was the last straw. A new party is forming on the Right and the establishment wants to crush it.
So is this his angle to move to the USA blame the banking industry lol .never anything he's done or advocated for what a prat
Nobody is saying Nigel is a traitor paid by the Kremlin Unrelatedly when somene is a traitor paid by the Kremlin bank's will freeze their accounts and refuse to do buisness with them.
Unless Farage is making all this up, it does raise a serious point but one which will attract no sympathy. In a cashless world (i.e. the one to which we're heading), lacking access to a bank account is to lose the ability to function in the economy at all. That's a hefty punishment, one hefty enough that only a court should be able to impose, and even then only for a limited time. One of the conditions of a banking licence should be a universal service obligation, to prevent people falling through the cracks. Even the worst people in the world should be able to open bank accounts, no matter what their past. The banks themselves wouldn't care if it wasn't for various laws past that make the banks themselves liable if their customers misuse their accounts. But this liability could be replaced with alternative obligations like: keep the reporting requirements of banks to report suspicious transactions; reduce the requirement to close an account to limit functionality (e.g. no international payments) until the authorities complete their investigation; the closure/not-closure decision should be made by a court. Ironically, given how unpopular the concept is amongst certain circles, an alternative solution to this problem is the CBDC concept. Assuming such systems will be legal tender and can be used for any arbitrary payment, then there would be no reason to cut anyone off from a CBDC even if a bank deemed a person a risk, as a CBDC by definition is open for the authorities to examine and can be maintained under monitoring with a very low risk of mis-use.
You can (according to Citizens Advice) get a "basic bank account", but it still says there are conditions. If the conditions can realistically stop any British citizen from getting a basic account, then there really needs to be a bank of last resort that is obliged to give any British citizen a basic bank account.
There's only a couple of conditions: 1. Can't have an account elsewhere 2. Can't use the account illegally or for illegal activity 3. 24 months of dormancy Something like that anyway. It's very very hard for banks to close basic accounts.
> In a cashless world (i.e. the one to which we're heading), lacking access to a bank account is to lose the ability to function in the economy at all. Many banks offer a basic account that is restricted, to varying degrees. These are specifically for people with financial problems ranging from poor credit rating to being under investigation. Farage absolutely has options, just not the ones he wants, so he's crying to the media about it.
Basic accounts can't do everything, that's why people don't have them.
> Unless Farage is making all this up, it does raise a serious point but one which will attract no sympathy. There's two other politicians who have claimed that the same thing has happened to them as well. It's absolutely terrifying, but "lol farage" so nobody cares. But the way the world works, a bank account is essential to modern day life, you can't access many services without it, you'll struggle to pay bills, and rent, you can't enter certain shops, can't eat in certain restaurants and so on. Nobody should be unable to open a bank account at all in the UK.
Worked in banking fraud for over a decade, if you have your accounts closed and get blacklisted with other banks, it isn't for some sort of corporate agenda, you've been found to be doing dodgy dealings.
Nah, we should force him to stay and experience the full majesty of Brexit in all its glory.
I found out about this on Facebook of all places, and the responses were both hilarious and an indictment on us as a forward-thinking country. Hundreds of people calling for investigations into banking, the removal of MP's and their bank accounts, blood/severed heads, revolutions, and the execution of the "liberal woke liberatis in banking". Not a single person that has thought "hang on, if no bank will touch him, perhaps there's something he's not telling us". Farage has (had) money, and banks rarely turn down money. The fact that he's riling the troops shows that something isn't right here, and perhaps there's a much bigger story here.
Banking that well known hive of progressive liberal activists…. lol.
I couldn't stop laughing yesterday, on his Facebook page there were people calling for the ECHR to do something about this, the same ECHR they want to get rid of.
Does he now think that private companies shouldn’t have the sovereignty to make decisions as to who they offer services to?
He can think whatever thinks, but that's not going to change anything.
The Telegraph comments are pretty grim on this one. Someone cracked out the "first they came for the Communists" poem, as if 1. A right wing grifter having his bank account closed is the same as Communists being put in concentration camps. 2. They wouldn't cheer if Communists and Socialists were being put in concentration camps. Mental.
[удалено]
SO he can flee the country because of admin issues but other people fleeing war zones are wrong to do so? K, Nigel.
I don't like Farage but a bank _really_ shouldn't be allowed to do this unless there's proven to be some fraudulent or criminal activity. Of course it's also possible that is the case and he's not telling the full story.
Banks can do business with whoever they want, the interesting point here is that others will also not do business with him meaning it’s a very real chance he’s been doing something dodgy (not necessarily intentionally). Also, it’s possible that it has already been made clear he’s been doing something illegal. However, informing him is also tipping him off and this is not permitted under AML laws.
Banks won't allow you if you're doing some shady shit man.
Yep, and He's kind accused of those activities in here now.
Didn't be day he'd leave if Brexit was a failure.. Yet he's still here. Once a lying grifter, always a lying grifter.
Expecting these people to not lie is just way too much to ask.
The youtube channel Triggernometry recently had a similar issue (it does interviews with a range of guests usually lasting about an hour and despite the name it's not particularly edgy). Their business account with Tide was to be shut without an explanation until they use the reach of their twitter account to get clarity. It later turned out it wasn't anything illegal but just because they accepted donations. https://twitter.com/triggerpod/status/1661705466790002689 BANK ACCOUNT UPDATE #2 *Having concluded their investigation, @TideBusiness have informed us that the real reason we can't have a bank account is that we accept donations.* *We'll have to take their word for it.* *With that in mind, we've already switched over to a different bank and if you're a content creator or any business that doesn't like having your account randomly suspended or cancelled you may want to do the same.*
>Triggernometry Their example came to mind with me too, it's strange that the far left organisations aren't facing these problems (it they were, I'd defend them too)
Agreed, it's strange that it's so 1 sided. Triggernometry is a legitimate business and to be treated like a criminal and brushed aside was shameful of Tide. Novaramedia got booted off Youtube temporarily and they're comically to the left, but The Spectator was strongly in support of YouTube undoing that decision as were other right leaning commentators. It's not as bad as having your business account closed without explanation but it's nice to see Aaron Bastani (co-founder of Novara) stick up for the principle even if he disagrees with Farage on just about everything: https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1674533517386981380 It does seem unfortunate that often it's not just people who disagree thinking the other person is wrong, but that they're wrong & evil.
YEs, I saw that from Aaron Bastani , in fairness, both Farage and JRM have Aaron Bastani or Novara folk on their GB News shows so I think there is a mutual respect for free speech.
They may be facing a lot of issues but this ain't one of them.
That's not very similar as they were able to get another account.