Thread: Are the Banks reading these threads?

Was just wondering whether the banks are actually reading stuff on here ??

Clearly if they are, surely they may be following some of the claims they are actually dealing with ?



Similar Threads:

• Zoot - Banks reading this website
• threads that change into other threads!
• Very interesting reading!!
• Joined and READING

As many people have put it...

"SO?"


Simply put, we are morally right, we are legally right and we also have a great support network.

Let them look on and shake.

If they are then they are acting illegally in contravention of the Computer Misuse Act unless they have notified admin first...

I believe Dave is monitoring the situation...

so now we know !

Good to know !

Personally I am more than a little bit suspicious as to their motives on here.
As employees they presumably have a duty to exercise certain loyalties and no one forced them to do their job.

I suspect they were aware of the penalties BEFORE the recent public awareness but I bet nothing was said then..

There remains an opportunity to gain knowledge here which by nature of the fact that they actively work for the very institutions that this site is taking to task,could be predudicial to some people here.

I am not saying that is the case with all the posters,but I can certainly see it being so with some.

Lets put it this way...................... .....Do you think the banks would be happy for US to log into one of their internal programmes in an area which is dealing with their legal issues ??

Originally Posted by MARTIN3030

Personally I am more than a little bit suspicious as to their motives on here.
As employees they presumably have a duty to exercise certain loyalties and no one forced them to do their job.

Sounds a little conspiratorial doesn't it? I don't think that your regular bank employee gives two hoots about how much money is being refunded. I can't imagine a team of office employees living from wage check to wage check logging in and placing posts to gain our trusts to try and then change the tide...

Ultimately, we are campaigning for what is rightfully ours, we're not being underhand which is why we can be transparent about our actions and discussions. There's nothing on these posts that the banks could read to help their defence, so let them read, and let them worry.

If we are being so open why do we not use our real names on this site? Perhaps I may answer my own question by suggesting that we don't want to be recognised and black listed by other financial institutions.
I'll try not to be too verbose but when I was a youth, my girlfriend and I were thought a bit strange, by our contemporaries, because we had bank accounts.
It was not the "done thing" in working class families.
How things have changed! - now you need a bank account for your benefits and state pension to be paid into.
So what happens if you do get black listed? (unofficially because we wouldn't want the OFT or FSA to know what we were doing would we)
By compelling even the poorest of us to have bank accounts, the Government have ensured that the financial institutions acquire a captive customer base. Only more stringent regulation can counteract this market bias. In the meantime, the Bank Action Group is the only organisation which seems to be acting in support of the consumer.
Keep on frightening them. Let them read the threads. Better still send them copies of the more sensational and articulate contributions. With the writer's consent, naturally.
To quote Shelley from Ozymandias - "Look on my works, ye mighty and despair" but without poor Ozie's Statue's ultimate demise of course.

I think that the government announced plans to force banks into offering basic account facilities following its withdrawel of its regular benefits payments.

After a few of them decided to offer it I dont think the government actually did anything else.

A pity they did not go further.

Originally Posted by Chris M

By compelling even the poorest of us to have bank accounts, the Government have ensured that the financial institutions acquire a captive customer base. Only more stringent regulation can counteract this market bias. In the meantime, the Bank Action Group is the only organisation which seems to be acting in support of the consumer.

I like the example set by Ireland. The have a large number of credit unions, a lot of which have high street branches. The benefit of credit unions is that they are owned by the members and the decisions are all made by the members. These don't have extortionate fees for getting into financial difficulties and are much more supportive.
The legislation in this country also allows this but hasn't been taken up.

The only large financial organisations in this country owned by the investors are currently building societies but even these have diminished rapidly by demutualisation. Most of the building societies around during my childhood have converted:
Abbey National, Woolwich, Alliance and Leicester, Halifax etc.

These have all converted because of personal greed by the (now ex) members.
I would like to see legislation to allow national credit unions to be formed without requirement of organisational or geographic links between members.

Benefits would then be paid into these accounts and people would not be lining the pockets of shareholders which are already, for the most part, wealthy already.

Originally Posted by LiTiGiOuS_OnE

To be honest I don't think it is in any way illegal for them to visit here as it is an open forum

Bank staff visiting this site are in breach of the site's terms and conditions, and are therefore causing an offence under the Computer Misuse Act.

Originally Posted by blueskies

I like the example set by Ireland. The have a large number of credit unions, a lot of which have high street branches. The benefit of credit unions is that they are owned by the members and the decisions are all made by the members. These don't have extortionate fees for getting into financial difficulties and are much more supportive.

I would like to see legislation to allow national credit unions to be formed without requirement of organisational or geographic links between members.

Benefits would then be paid into these accounts and people would not be lining the pockets of shareholders which are already, for the most part, wealthy already.

Given we have a common link - we've all been (edit) from by the banks - why not set up our own Consumer Action Group Credit Union ?

moderated whilst we understand your annoyance we have to remove any comments that could be seen as libelous

EDIT: You can't libel an undefined group. The banks and building societies, in general are [edit]. What they are doing is [edit]. Lets not beat about the bush here...

Anyway, since I am a co-owner of one of the "libelees" they'd best not try to sue in MY name.

[MODERATED: We will not tolerate these comments. FINAL WARNING]

[EDIT - so why not have the decency to tell me you've done so. You're not following the forum rules by simply moderating the truth away...]

The Banks are civil offenders, as demonstrated by case after case being settled where they have unlawfully taken money with the intent of permanent deprivation. Check section 24A of the relevant 1968 legislation quoted in the Legal statutes library.


Please read the rules of this site that you agreed to when registering


I'm fully aware of the rules of the site. The owners of the site introduced the 1968 Theft Act (in the statutes library), I'm merely quoting from it.