Farage

[noseall]

It looks very much like the timeline was something like this:
- Coutts wanted rid of NF so started a report on him to built a case. This report went beyond their KYC obligations and included defamatory material.
- The report concluded that he was not the sort they wanted, but continued to be commercially viable.
- Naughty bank hatches a plan to end his mortgage to fix that.
- Bank account closed, NF briefed the press.
- Coutts via their CEO briefed the Beeb via a dinner chit chat, that he was actually too poor to keep his account. breach of data protection law as well as confidentiality.
- the beeb ran the story
- NF submitted a subject access request, proving the facts.
- naughty bank went in to damage limitation, but made it worse
- Government people stepped in because it appears he was de-banked for political reasons - which are protected.
- CEO apologised and the beeb amended the story.
- NF enjoys the banks bad PR, even the guardian is confused as it doesn't know if it hates the Sloane rangers at the bank more than NF.
- NF consults lawyers - Lawyers prepare bills and do a little work
- NF asks ICO to investigate the naughty bank, more meat for his case.
- NF demands apology from BBC due to damages, gravy on the side

Pretty much sums it up. Poor Nige.

On the bright side - he can now bank with Natwest.

 

[motorbiking]

It was Nigel who publicised the report, the press briefing was correct if slightly premature.

No apology for something that NF put in the public domain himself.

This is political rather than legal, far-rage is out for the head of natwest.

Blup

While this video is pre- the subject access request, it outlines the case for defamation - though here the author sets out the case against NF. In fact the same test applies. But it does explain that it is not necessary to publish the defamatory claim in the public media. It can merely be sufficient to create and distribute it, which it did. Then of course there is the chit chat to the beeb, which doesn't help.

 

[blup]

Technical breach of defamation and data protection, now doing 30.00002 in a 30 limit. Legal costs will vastly outweigh any compensation. Lets see how the crowdfunding goes.

Blup

 

[JohnD]

Has Farage been defamed?

 

[gant]

Guardian has its own way of putting it's boot into the rich man's bank, quite amusing as well

Coutts’ virtue-signalling plan had one flaw. The bank has no virtue to signal | Catherine Bennett

Compiling the Farage dossier takes some cheek when you have so many ghastly clients

www.theguardian.com

 

[blup]

Has Farage been defamed?

That's up to the court/jury if it gets there. I suspect this is about trying to force an admission of breach of human rights re data protection, so he can put political pressure on the bank to sack the boss and any other heads that will roll.

Blup

 

[noseall]

so he can put political pressure on the bank to sack the boss

Still be hard to find anyone that will welcome forrige.

 

[fillyboy]

MSN

 

[blup]

Dishy fires a warning shot at woke banks...lol, he must be the least influential PM of recent times. His problem is that relaxing the rules on risk could allow money laundering through our banking system.

Blup

 

[Vinty]

Dishy fires a warning shot at woke banks...lol, he must be the least influential PM of recent times. His problem is that relaxing the rules on risk could allow money laundering through our banking system.

Blup

Banks are for keeping your money safe.
Banks don't, or shouldn't get involved in politics.
The Banks already have too much power over tge individual.

 

[JohnD]

Banks are for keeping your money safe.

Banks believe that their purpose is to make maximum profits, and maximum pay and benefits for the Executive Directors.

 

[JohnD]

That's up to the court/jury if it gets there.

Does Farage claim that he has been defamed?

 

[Vinty]

Banks believe that their purpose is to make maximum profits, and maximum pay and benefits for the Executive Directors.

To achieve that objective, the people who have no choice but to keep their money in a bank need to believe that is the safest place for their hard earned to be kept.
If confidence in this is challenged then there will be a revolt.
In my opinion the banks are taking the ****.

 

[JohnD]

Seems to be working

 

[blup]

Banks are for keeping your money safe.
Banks don't, or shouldn't get involved in politics.
The Banks already have too much power over tge individual.

I agree but if the bank was cancelling farrage for his political views 19 million other brexhit voting accounts would have been closed. It was a unique assessment of a unique individual with a unique platform. Risk management is fundamental to any business. I doubt the government will legislate against that.

Blup