agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,048 
Likes: 4,438
|
Post by agent69 on Jun 30, 2023 16:59:27 GMT
If this is the case then should impropriety be proven in the Sturgeon case then presumably the banks will close the accounts for her and her hubby and the SNP in terms of reputational damage then Piers Corbyn would be high up my list of fruit cakes and being associated with him or his slightly less nutty brother would put me off banking with whoever. Indeed would many people wish to be associated with the bank that provides services to Andrew Windsor ( formerly known as Prince ) however I would say that everyone should have the right to a bank account, as without it getting your state pension, benefits etc is well nigh impossible I think you would struggle to seperate them in a 'nutty as a fruit cake' competition.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jun 30, 2023 16:59:29 GMT
They do, they take it very seriously. The costs are immense. The costs of getting it wrong are far, far greater. (Speaking from experience) What is the cost in saying "NO" ? Who is saying no here?
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,019
Likes: 5,147
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 30, 2023 17:52:33 GMT
I suppose the question that needs to be asked ... assuming it is the PEP explanation as no reason has actually been given ... is why now? Hes been a PEP for more than 2 decades and far more exposed previously than he is now as a TV presenter, even an award winning one. Indeed. And the legislation is now six years old.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
|
Post by michaelc on Jun 30, 2023 19:04:48 GMT
What is the cost in saying "NO" ? Who is saying no here? The bank to the client.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jun 30, 2023 19:21:16 GMT
Ahh right. Well, you lose the business (that the client would be expected to bring). Managing assets, tax / trust advice, IPOs, loans, FX, M&A, bond issuance etc etc etc etc. That could be small scale (eg Farage), or mega-scale, eg Musk or Abramovich. Whether general PEP criteria changed recently, or whether any particular bank reassessed its appetite for PEP related risk, I don't know... Personally I think considering taking on a toxic buffoon who's also a PEP and possibly involved in shady stuff might be sub-optimal from a risk / reward perspective.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jun 30, 2023 19:21:52 GMT
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
|
Post by michaelc on Jun 30, 2023 19:41:35 GMT
Ahh right. Well, you lose the business (that the client would be expected to bring). Managing assets, tax / trust advice, IPOs, loans, FX, M&A, bond issuance etc etc etc etc. That could be small scale (eg Farage), or mega-scale, eg Musk or Abramovich. Whether general PEP criteria changed recently, or whether any particular bank reassessed its appetite for PEP related risk, I don't know... Personally I think considering taking on a toxic buffoon who's also a PEP and possibly involved in shady stuff might be sub-optimal from a risk / reward perspective. Ahhh I think you've illustrated my point quite well. It sounds like you were a banker at one stage. IMO there ought to be checks and balances to prevent individual bwankers from determining who is and who isn't a toxic buffoon and therefore who is and who isn't allowed to open an account.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jun 30, 2023 19:50:00 GMT
Ahh right. Well, you lose the business (that the client would be expected to bring). Managing assets, tax / trust advice, IPOs, loans, FX, M&A, bond issuance etc etc etc etc. That could be small scale (eg Farage), or mega-scale, eg Musk or Abramovich. Whether general PEP criteria changed recently, or whether any particular bank reassessed its appetite for PEP related risk, I don't know... Personally I think considering taking on a toxic buffoon who's also a PEP and possibly involved in shady stuff might be sub-optimal from a risk / reward perspective. Ahhh I think you've illustrated my point quite well. It sounds like you were a banker at one stage. IMO there ought to be checks and balances to prevent individual bwankers from determining who is and who isn't a toxic buffoon and therefore who is and who isn't allowed to open an account. There are.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jun 30, 2023 20:06:02 GMT
Seems like a number of banks have come to the same conclusion, I don't know why, but if there are dodgy transactions, or excess costs associated with his accounts it could be a reason. Could he pay extra bank fees?
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 30, 2023 20:25:09 GMT
Ahh right. Well, you lose the business (that the client would be expected to bring). Managing assets, tax / trust advice, IPOs, loans, FX, M&A, bond issuance etc etc etc etc. That could be small scale (eg Farage), or mega-scale, eg Musk or Abramovich. Whether general PEP criteria changed recently, or whether any particular bank reassessed its appetite for PEP related risk, I don't know... Personally I think considering taking on a toxic buffoon who's also a PEP and possibly involved in shady stuff might be sub-optimal from a risk / reward perspective. Ahhh I think you've illustrated my point quite well. It sounds like you were a banker at one stage. IMO there ought to be checks and balances to prevent individual bwankers from determining who is and who isn't a toxic buffoon and therefore who is and who isn't allowed to open an account.There are (to repeat what someone else has said). Some form of AML or Risk division/officer or similar would have flagged it. To pick a bank at complete random: HSBC. It had a revenue in last year of $15.56 bn. In an organisation like that, the CEO doesn't wake up in the morning and say: I don't like the cut of the jib of xxxxx and then removes their banking facilities like some tinpot Putiin. So you can sleep peacefully: you're desire for 'checks and balances' is already met.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,019
Likes: 5,147
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 30, 2023 22:22:29 GMT
Personally I think considering taking on a toxic buffoon who's also a PEP and possibly involved in shady stuff might be sub-optimal from a risk / reward perspective. ...especially given his frequent claims to be skint, and his increasingly desperate attempts at churning some income, any income. <source chosen deliberately>
|
|
jo
Member of DD Central
dead
Posts: 741
Likes: 498
|
Post by jo on Jul 1, 2023 8:57:23 GMT
Most likely it's ESG score related - under pressure from progressive fraudy asset management companies such as BlackSock & Flanguard..
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jul 1, 2023 15:14:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Jul 1, 2023 18:39:09 GMT
Or - and here's a radical thought... they should extract their finger from their rectum, and start processing asylum claims in a timely fashion?  Y'know, like we're actually obliged to do by umpteen international treaties? I mean, it's a win-win situation, isn't it? Those who are genuine refugees get to rebuild their lives instead of sitting in stasis. Those who aren't get returned to their country of origin. There's no need for shedloads of expensive temporary accommodation. What's not to like about it...? (Unless, of course, the government's actual goal is to stoke division and hatred. Then the current indolence and inactivity makes perfect sense.) Couldnt agree more.
|
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Jul 1, 2023 18:54:22 GMT
Ahhh I think you've illustrated my point quite well. It sounds like you were a banker at one stage. IMO there ought to be checks and balances to prevent individual bwankers from determining who is and who isn't a toxic buffoon and therefore who is and who isn't allowed to open an account.There are (to repeat what someone else has said). Some form of AML or Risk division/officer or similar would have flagged it. To pick a bank at complete random: HSBC. It had a revenue in last year of $15.56 bn. In an organisation like that, the CEO doesn't wake up in the morning and say: I don't like the cut of the jib of xxxxx and then removes their banking facilities like some tinpot Putiin. So you can sleep peacefully: you're desire for 'checks and balances' is already met.
Of course they are... but some checks and balances are more serious than other checks and balances based on WHO YOU ARE.
|
|
.
