Politically exposed persons are a special category under Moneylaundering regulations. They have to be tracked under the Proceeds of Crime Act and pose a reputational and regulatory risk to the company.
The definition is quite narrowly defined and is linked to political activity, not affiliation alone.
On the upside, lists of PEPs will be useful if we have a revolution
It is puzzling that answering 'Conservative' or 'Labour' would mean you were or were not a "politically exposed person".
Why did you set up an account with Lloyds? Everyone knows they are rubbish.
Quite happy to shill off the taxpayer then, eh, Jonathan?
Only banks people should join are Alliance & Leicester, Abbey, or the Co-op.
Why did you set up an account with Lloyds? Everyone knows they are rubbish.Quite happy to shill off the taxpayer then, eh, Jonathan?
Only banks people should join are Alliance & Leicester, Abbey, or the Co-op.
LOL WUT???
Dude! Would you lay off of the cough syrup before posting if I asked really nicely?
Why did you set up an account with Lloyds? Everyone knows they are rubbish. Quite happy to shill off the taxpayer then, eh, Jonathan?
I have been an account-holder with Lloyds since 1984 and for nearly all of that time, they have done a decent enough job. There are benefits to being a loyal customer which one does not lightly cast aside. As for the Co-Op, A&L, etc, there are drawbacks with using building societies in terms of the range of products they offer.
As for my "shilling" off the taxpayer, I did not ask for my bank to be screwed by this government, nor, as a taxpayer myself (top-bracket), do I consider myself to be a parasite off the state. However, I may still move to another bank, but the options are not great. Possibly HSBC or Barclays.
I have responded politely to your rather abusive tone so kindly try and be a bit more civil if you want to continue enjoying these comment threads. Understood?
Once government says certain compaines are "too big to fail" the consequences are not just economic.
Even if I believed in their economic theories (which I do not), I hope I would still have the courage to sat "still no bailouts - because bailouts corrupt everything and destroy our freedom".
"Freedom to starve" - as someone who has always been poor (although I have never gone without food for more than a couple of days) I am not impressed by "we need to do this to save people from poverty" arugments. Even if I believed in the economic theories behind such claims which, I repeat, I do not.
In the end a nation that gives up its freedom to avoid poverty ends up enslaved - and dirt poor.
As for the Cooperative Bank.
I have no problem with people forming coops or communes (monks and nuns have being this for thousands of years).
However, I wish the coop would not spend so much money on advertising - the endless adverts get on my nerves.
Are Brits so sheepish to even tolerate being asked this question? We sassy Americans wouldn't put up with it for a second. Mind your own effin' business, buddy!
Vetting is for nominees.