[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 5062)
File  []
>> No. 5062 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 4:01 pm
5062 spacer
>How corporations can delete your existence

>Let’s call her Laura. In September, Laura was out in Leeds City Centre, buying some bits, when her card was declined. Funny, she thought. She definitely wasn’t in the red. But these things happen, so she left the shop, tinting crimson, and dashed towards the nearest cashpoint. But her card wouldn’t work at the cashpoint either. She tried another one. With the same result. Laura opened the banking app on her phone. It said only ‘error’, then automatically closed. She finally abandoned her shopping and went into the nearest branch of Santander. There, the counter assistant seemed just as mystified. After about an hour of waiting, though, Laura was called through into the manager’s office.

>“I’m going to read a statement out for you,” the manager said. “But I’m not going to be able to answer any of your questions after that. We have locked your bank account. We can’t give you any more information. We might be in touch in future with more information. But we don’t know when that might be.”

>Could she have her money? No. But how was she supposed to get home? After all, she lived eight miles outside of Leeds, and now she had no bus fare. Apparently, this was not the bank’s business. This low-rent version of The Trial went on for another three weeks. Frequently, Laura would phone up Santander customer services. She’d be put on hold for ages. Then the phone would just go dead. She wrote to Santander to complain. They wrote back: they weren’t interested in her complaint and wouldn’t be taking it any further. Meanwhile, her rent, standing orders and Direct Debits stacked up, the late fees and penalties mushroomed around them, as life tumbled towards chaos.

>Nearly a month on, she received a letter from Santander: Under the terms and conditions… we can withdraw banking facilities at any time, and in line with company policy we don’t give further details.

>The account had been closed. Without apparent irony, the balance had been appended as a cheque.


Reading that was quite unsettling. What is going to be the impact of unpersoning in a society that is increasingly cashless and driven by online transactions?

Gordon Brown tried to instate a right to a bank account but it was shot down by the banks themselves. I think it underlies how our society is now underpinned by effective public utilities that remain subject to a belief in a right to refuse service and which then effectively become tools of social control outside of the remit of even the state - an AnCap dream maybe but more like a nightmare that borders on the social credit system of China.
Expand all images.
>> No. 5063 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 4:24 pm
5063 spacer
It is a very scary prospect and the type of thing that can creep up slowly. One of the reasons I have obly used cash during the whole debacle this year.
>> No. 5064 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 5:08 pm
5064 spacer
‘Laura’ could be any of us. But she is also Laura Towler, one of the founders of Patriotic Alternative. Towler is a sort of next-gen BNP type, a net-savvy white identitarian who campaigns against mass-migration, and occasionally winks to her Telegram followers about ‘you know who’ (they know alright: The Jews). It would seem that Towler had been expelled from Santander for her views. But in line with the bank’s conditions, this has not been made clear.

I am guessing that she became what is known as a Politically Exposed Person. I am also guessing that she was getting donations from people, for her nascent political party. At that point, for any bank, you're going on a list.


I don't want so suggest its fair, but at that point your bank is going to red-flag your account and it will go for manual review. If that person then finds you're then espousing controversial / dicey opinions, plus taking donations (I am still guessing at that bit) then they totally have the right to not want to be associated with you and close the account.

So my point is, this doesn't just happen to random people.
>> No. 5066 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 5:20 pm
5066 spacer
Oh yeah?
>> No. 5067 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 5:28 pm
5067 spacer
We don't have any information about how those people were operating their accounts. Were they getting regular payments or making payments to risky places? Are they getting regular, non-standard cash payments of a risky size? Are they associated through family to people who are PEPs or fraudsters?

Again, I'm not making value judgements about those people or activities (although in Laura Towlers case I probably would) - just trying to describe how the system(s) work. The only cases I have seen where this happens by accident is if you share the same name as a fraudster or PEP.
>> No. 5068 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 5:30 pm
5068 spacer

Yeah yeah, it's fine because she's a Nazi and all that, all you have to do is not be a Nazi and you'll be fine.

But they could have at least given her her money.
>> No. 5069 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 5:34 pm
5069 spacer

They did though - probably after checking all the payments she was getting and making sure a Suspicious Activity Report was correctly filed with law enforcement authorities.
>> No. 5070 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 5:54 pm
5070 spacer
I would make an assumption that this is linked to the USA Patriot act, which compels banks and payment providers operating in the USA to police their customers for suspicious activity, on the grounds of "preventing terrorism".

Otherlads have suggested that she's probably been getting donations linked to her quasi-political party, and its most likely that the banks are looking for any sort of activity like that regardless of which country the customer is in to make sure their records are squeaky clean.
>> No. 5071 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 5:58 pm
5071 spacer
No, it is UK-based - the Financial Conduct Authority mandates all of this.

Your second part is right though, banks in the UK are extremely regulated by the FCA, the PRA and to be honest, don't want the grief of dealing with dodgy customers who might be fraudsters, terrorists or politically exposed persons. Law enforcement authorities and successive governments of all stripes have put these regulations in place because they often can't catch people in the act of doing a crime, or deter those crimes, but they can easily regulate the banks into oblivion to "follow the money" and do it for them.
>> No. 5072 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 6:00 pm
5072 spacer

I think the lesson here is "if you're going to run a neo-Nazi fundraiser using your personal bank account, you should probably keep some cash on hand for emergencies".
>> No. 5073 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 6:06 pm
5073 spacer
Santander are really keen on combining accounts and cross-funding if they feel like it.
They tied together two of my company accounts and a personal one, and would casually take money from whichever account contained it. For my convenience, and because fuck you.
So, keep your nazi contributions in a completely different bank, and hope they don't buy each other.
>> No. 5076 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 6:15 pm
5076 spacer
>They tied together two of my company accounts and a personal one

They're totally allowed to do that, unless those company accounts are Limited Company accounts. You just didn't read the T&Cs. In the context of an individual person, account means nothing. A limited company is like a person in its own right, separate from you.

Don't keep your nazi contributions in any bank account, or any financial institution or electronic money company that talks to CIFAS (protip: everyone does). That includes PayPal. I bet in this Laura Towler case it was PayPal donations that did her.
>> No. 5079 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 6:22 pm
5079 spacer
And you lot say crypto has no valid use cases.

Bitcoin, the Nazi bank.
>> No. 5080 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 6:24 pm
5080 spacer
Should opt to be paid in gay wedding cakes and sell those on. Let's see bankers put that in their pipe and smoke it.
>> No. 5081 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 6:28 pm
5081 spacer
>>5076 They are indeed limited companies. They apologised. I didn't ask for the accounts to be linked in any way - the second company's account details suddenly became accessed from the first company's login page, along with my personal account. And then they did the cross-payment thing.
The same two people had login rights for both accounts, but combining companies did seem like a dodgy optimisation.
>> No. 5083 Anonymous
31st October 2020
Saturday 6:45 pm
5083 spacer
If that's the case, then you should complain to the Financial Ombudsman - again, banks don't want the grief of dealing with regulators, so a complaint to them will almost always find in your favour if you have an actual case. It takes about 90 days, but if they've genuinely fucked up and cost you money, you will get it back.

Return ]

Delete Post []