Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1707173757687

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,036 ✭✭✭growleaves


    The Guardian newspaper's wealth correspondent reported that Coutts' "reputation is at risk".

    "The affair, say crisis management experts, risks “destroying Coutts’s reputation, if not its entire business”."

    People in the banking industry seem to think its a big deal reputationally even as boardsies downplay it.

    Of course boardsies want there to be no downside risk to ransoming people's financial access against political conformity.

    However that isn't the case. Read the business papers' coverage of the reputational aspect.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,905 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    And it's the handling of the issue rather than the decision itself that is the source of the impact, which the article clearly calls out.

    People aren't happy that Rose talked and rightly so and they didn't move to shut Farage down quickly by dealing with him directly and giving their reasons.

    The last line of the article is absolutely correct

    “They should have put a blanket on the fire when it first ignited. Instead they’ve thrown petrol on it.”

    By not responding to Farage quickly and clearly 8/9 months ago , they left a vacuum which Farage filled with hot-air.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Probably involved in the decision to disclose info to the press then.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,036 ✭✭✭growleaves


    In the dossier they called Farage a “disingenuous grifter”.

    Even if that is how you view a customer, would you write it down on a piece of paper or PC screen where it would be seen by someone?

    The political criteria and the way it was laid out and "weighed" as part of the decision is not just a detail. To anyone who doesn't hate Farage bitterly (many people) its a major part of the scandal.

    While they might not have been technically unlawful or unjustified in closing his account as such, the fall-out is not around legal technicalities only.

    You seem to me to be blinded by your own political prejudices.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,626 ✭✭✭McFly85


    Justin Doherty isn’t in the banking industry - he’s an issues management consultant(and one who loves the word woke by the looks of it).

    Coutts reputation has undoubtedly taken a hit, I don’t think it’s possible to argue otherwise, but it’s hyperbolic in the extreme to suggest it will destroy its whole business.

    Nigel has his account back now so in a couple of weeks it will go back to business as usual, with the majority of the outraged still unable to bank with them.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Many people behaved unprofessionally. Everyone who was shown to have acted unprofessionally resigned.

    None of that invalidates the decsion they made and the reasons they made it with regard to Farage. Anyone who supports Farage is outraged - but what does that tell us - people are tribal.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,036 ✭✭✭growleaves


    A "Reputation and issues management" consultant. Connected to the banking industy through his work, though not of it.

    "and one who love the word woke"

    Don't we all?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,036 ✭✭✭growleaves


    The decision was at least partly informed by (unprofessionaly expressed) political criteria. Farage's views are mostly ordinary enough however much they make prim people wince.

    The angle I'm coming is I don't want political tests mixed with commercial criteria. I'm not a British nationalist or Brexiteer.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,626 ✭✭✭McFly85


    They said there is a public perception of him as a disingenuous grifter - they didn’t accuse him of being anything directly.

    It’s an important distinction - what other people think of him may affect our business adversely, essentially.

    And it dispels the idea that people are being targeted by their beliefs, but rather what they’re known for, and what an association with that person could mean for future business.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 42,410 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Nonsense. The angle is that Farage should be above the rules that the rest of us must abide by.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Its really not about his politics - its about the fact that he is seen to represent an unsavoury approach to the world. If he held all of those views in private and didn't make it his business to court a certain type of contraversy he would undoubtedly have been fine (apart from the inescapable fact that he was to poor to be a customer).



  • Posts: 2,263 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    If Farage was not commercially viable and posed a reputational risk to Coutts, they wouldn't have reinstated his accounts.

    And no, it wasn't to "silence" Farage going forward.

    Because when Farage was told he would recieve the accounts back, he launched a litigation lawsuit which he intends to pursue. There is no silencing.

    Farage was never a reputational risk. He was never commercially unviable.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,068 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    The wall Street journal writing about the problems when the sanctimony of the woke class gets involved in finance. They couldn't care less about Farage but are pointing out the damage it does to the business, nevermind the wrongs and abuses against the customers.


    Thousands have already joined the campaign n against account closed and no explanation or reasoning.


    Organize, fight back.


    As the song goes..

    " What they could not kill,

    Went on to organize,

    Went on to organize."



  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    They did it to shut him up. Simple as that. He still has insufficient funds - they just used the discretion they always had to ignore that and his unsavoury character. At this stage its pure cost benefit, if we give him his account back will he bore of his new crucade and drop it.


    If Farage is litigating he has made his first big mistake - what is he claiming ? That Coutts liabelled him ?



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,905 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    I think they said that he was "viewed" as a "disingenuous grifter" which probably isn't altogether inaccurate in terms of it being a widely held public perception, but you are absolutely correct - Having it in writing is very poor.

    As I said that the time when Farage released the document , the language used is very poor and I have no doubt that they would have preferred to have written it differently in more "Parliamentary language" as it were.

    To summarise -

    • They had every right to make the decision they made for the reasons they gave, however they have made an absolute balls of doing it.
    • The review document was incredibly poorly written and not at all "sanitised" as you would have expected a document like that to be.
    • It appears that they basically tried to ignore Farage when he was looking for answers hoping he would just go away , that was a significant mistake. It's always a mistake when dealing with any customer complaints , but it's an even bigger one when you are dealing with someone with a large media bull-horn.
    • Once it went public , they further compounded the issue by continuing to try to minimise and avoid the issue.
    • Rose made it much worse by talking to the BBC Journalist and releasing private information, that's probably the biggest source of damage to a bank that pretty much exists solely to help the elite keep their activities private.

    In short , an originally valid decision that was subsequently handled incredibly badly and they ceded the ground to Farage by trying to ignore him rather than meeting him head on.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,089 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    This. 100%

    Plenty of firms and individuals that did and are still doing business with Russia to this day and nothing said. This is personal though.

    Not a Farage fan and couldn't care less about him.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,905 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    It has always been about public reputation not "politics".

    Banks don't give a toss who or what you are , they care about profits.

    The Banks care what their other customers think , they themselves have no opinion beyond what makes then money.

    Washing money from Despots? , Handling dodgy Russian Oligarchs money?

    All fine , as long as no one is talking about it and more importantly no one is talking about the bank in the context of the dodgy dealing.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 42,410 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    This tired old line again.

    If it was about his political views, he'd have been denied the account to begin with.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,905 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    His only viable legal challenge would be around the breach of privacy from Rose where he might have a case.

    Nothing else that has happened is illegal under UK law.



  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Compensation apparently 🤣 All those lost grifting hours.

    Good luck Nige 🤣



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I think its a bad decision on Coutts part - the damage is done already so why change your mind at this stage.

    Its a blinder to appoint a Muslim to the chairmans post. Stroke of genius.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,036 ✭✭✭growleaves


    Yes Syed can act as a PR human shield while the footsoldiers of political correctness deflect criticm of Coutts with shouts of "racism".



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,068 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    They know he was treated different to other existing customers who were exactly the same.


    What does it matter as long as this CEO is capable, capability should have been more important before this in hiring.



  • Posts: 6,626 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I think Nige wont like it - which was the point.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,068 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Doesn't matter if he likes it or not and I don't think that he cares or that they would take that in to consideration, they surely have adults deciding such an issue.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Donald Trump would also call into Howard Stern and other radio programs pretending to be the man on the street and showering praise upon... himself.

    Hmm.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    The reason they gave him back his account is because they leaked personal info and that is overall more problematic for them at the moment. Farage's reputation as a disingenuous grifter and bigot remains intact. By your logic, if he named the 9 banks who have rejected him, they'd all accept him as a customer and if anything, they probably view him as an even more volatile customer to ever consider...


    The parties in Ireland that share Farage's views don't actually get elected in Ireland. Maybe you're referring to the bigots who harass library staff or have engaged in fire bombings?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,029 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    If this whole mess was merely about Farage's politics, he would have been jettisoned years ago. Coutts was, probably, always a bit antsy about the frog faced piece of shit and the nasty bile he spouts, but had to wait until he fell below the financial threshold before they could pull the trigger, as it were.

    In any case, Coutts aren't coming out of this dizzy affair smelling of roses. But, then again, I doubt anyone here will be shedding too many tears over them. I certainly won't, and as I said earlier, I don't believe that an exclusive instituion like Coutts should be allowed to exist in the first place. If I had my way there'd be no such thing as "private" rich people banks like Coutts, and what remained would be all be regulated up the wazoo.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,905 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    John Barron wasn't it?

    I wonder how his youngest son feels about being named after a pseudonym his father used to use to tell sad pathetic lies about himself on Radio shows??



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 2,263 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It's complete nonsense.

    If it were financial, Coutts had no need -- zero need -- to compile the dossier on his political views.

    Throw in the Woke rubbish in recent years, and exiting Farage after his mortgage was paid off gave them the golden opportunity to get rid of him.

    The reason why Farage was allowed to enter Coutts is because the "inclusive values" stuff we see absolutely everywhere these days did not exist at the time.

    When Farage joined Coutts, Brexit did not take place either. Yet he had his mortgage.

    It's a failed political hit job.



Advertisement