Nigel Farage cries persecution, nobody wants to be his banker after ties to Russia

Yes, she did resign, which is a big deal. But she resigned because of the leak, not because of the account closure decision. That decision, as you'll have noted, still stands.

It's true that the Treasury aren't finished yet, but the proposals they have announced are as I outlined. The likelihood that they will prohibit discrimination in banking on the basis of political opinion is not very high. There would be a couple of problems with such a proposal:

• Why just prohibit discrimination in banking? Other protected characteristics apply to all businesses; if political opinion requires protection, why does it only require protection in a banking context? Shouldn't we be thinking of amending the equality legislation to make political opinion a protected characterist generally? If not, why not? And why do the reasons for not doing this in other businesses not apply to banking?
• A right to basic banking services is already assured by existing law. Doesn't this mean that there is, if anything, less need to single out banking, as opposed to, say, internet or telephone services? If your concern here is freedom of speech, how can you say that banks can't deny you any of their services because of your political opinions but internet providers, social media business, newspapers, etc remain free to deny you all of their services?
• How is this going to affect efforts to combat money-laundering/financing of terrorism/etc? Banks are expected to co-operate with the authorities on these matters, and a lot of the actions they are asked to take are intelligence-driven. If banks have to justify their actions to their customers by showing that they are not motivated by a distaste for the customer's politics, they only way they can do that is by showing what does motivate them, which means disclosing the intelligence. That's going to be a big problem. For that reason alone, I suspect the police and the intelligence agencies will not support any suggestion to expand the right to banking services in the way suggested.

For all these reasons, it's a hundred to one against the tiny little tail of Farage and his posh person's bank account being allowed to wag the dog of the banker-customer relationship in the way some of Farage's softer-brained fanboys are predicting.

He doesn't have enough money for a Coutts bank account. Him blaring everything about them closing his account has caused them a reputational risk. Can't see them opening an account again for him.

the EU? thats a Segway ! I reserve judgment that these rules havnt been abused by hacktivist staff

Well that's nonsense. She didn't even really know the full reasons.

I didnt say commonly , but if there is one, there is more than one

It wasn't a gamble. The bank expected that as with all their other customers, Farage would be too embarrassed to lie about it and draw attention to his situation publicly. Most people with accounts with such a bank would not want the world to know that they had lost such access.

They completely miscalculated in that Farage has no level of embarrassment. The fact he got Brexit so completely wrong and has led to such a massive cost to the UK and he still feels no shame should have warned them of that.

The reputational risk comes from the subsequent leak. Not the closure of Farage's account.

The CEO should have kept her mouth shut. Farage and others have shown that facts don't matter, so little point in trying to correct the record. That she made things worse is truly astonishing, one wonders how she ever got into her position given such a complete lack of thinking on her part.

More heads to roll today no doubt, who gave the info to Natwest anyway, someone must of ? Tip of the iceburg this lads, news coming out of it happening in America also now.

Big meeting today with the banks

Well, he originally claimed that the banks were trying to run him out of town because he masterminded Brexit. Which was, and still is, complete and utter nonsense.

Rose was right to step down because she mishandled customer information. Her actions do not prove Farage right or justify his shouting inaccurate information from the rooftops.

And of course, he won’t be getting his account back because that decision was nothing to do with Roses actions.

Farage has proven just how much risk he is to a bank with this debacle.