Discrimation by Halifax against Scottish children?!

adouglasmhor

atush wrote: »

English is my mother language. I did not lie.

You cant come on here spouting like that, and not expect a response. Sorry. No appologies from me on this fact. Everyone who attends University at an English institution pays. So no discrimination.

And anyone who wants a halifax acct can get one, if they make an effort to do so.

You lied by saying I was wrong and by saying I said England discriminated. You are a liar and for a native English speaker your understanding is poor at best.

You Liar.

23n1th

opinions4u wrote: »

As is Lloyds TSB. Or C&G. Or Birmingham Midshires. Or Intelligent Finance.

All have different products accessible in different ways.

I don't expect to walk in to a Halifax branch and be able to get a car via Lex Vehicle Leasing. But LBG own both.

If I go in to TopMan, I don't expect to be able to buy Miss Selfridge goods. Both part of the same parent company.

I'm not talking about completely different things like bank accounts and cars, don't be silly.

When I moved to scotland I had a normal current account which I changed to a reward account in scotland. In fact I think I might have changed it due to this website. Now suddenly I can't open another one???

Apply online? Or by telephone? While that option isn't available for Kids Regular Saver, it most certainly is for the Reward current account.

It would seem according to the bank themselves you need to open a joint account in branch where they can't offer the reward account.

So its childrens savers and joint accounts.

George_Michael

adouglasmhor wrote: »

You are a liar and for a native English speaker your understanding is poor at best.

Your understanding of English doesn't appear to be perfect either

No it's not, if you let our students in for free we would let yours in, no one is discriminating unlawfully.

The above sentence states that you think that no unlawful discrimination is going on, but it certainly implies that you think discrimination is occurring, just not unlawful discrimination, otherwise why was there the need to add the word "unlawful"?

adouglasmhor

George_Michael wrote: »

Your understanding of English doesn't appear to be perfect either



The above sentence states that you think that no unlawful discrimination is going on, but it certainly implies that you think discrimination is occurring, just not unlawful discrimination, otherwise why was there the need to add the word "unlawful"?

I do believe it is discrimination, discrimination is sometimes justifiable or not illegal (examples, people with a recent history of epilepsy can not drive, women can’t join front line regiments in the army as combat troops) , and I am not so sure in this case it is justifiable.

I have an idea; if English people are upset about them paying fees when we don't, sort their own government out, campaign to bring England in line with most of the rest of northern Europe. Don't have a hissy fit at us every chance they get.