Halifax blacklisted Daughter for declining card!

meer53

GingerBob wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be of the opinion that the banks, your bank (and I bet your superiors don't know you're posting on here) are doing customers a favour by allowing them to avail themselves of your wonderful services. If this is so, then you couldn't be further from the truth. The customer does you an immense favour by lending you their dosh for next to no interest, or by paying interest on the money you lend them. The customer pays your wage and the shareholders' dividends. You are totally dependent on them.

Actually, i'm not. Please don't make comments about people who you know absolutely nothing about.

GingerBob_3

meer53 wrote: »

Actually, i'm not. Please don't make comments about people who you know absolutely nothing about.

Well apologies if I've got it wrong. However, if you work for a bank then the customers, of whatever kind, keep you in business.

meer53

GingerBob wrote: »

Well apologies if I've got it wrong. However, if you work for a bank then the customers, of whatever kind, keep you in business.

You're correct. Banks are businesses.

They can choose who they want to do business with. Having won £20m on the lottery is no guarantee you will get an account.

SimonSays

gunsandbanjos wrote: »

Thank you, someone else who knows that blacklists do exist.

You mean the list that is produced to tell institutions whom not to do business with.

The very list that has certain Russians on it and when he was alive the likes of Saddam Hussain.

It is a blacklist but your average joe would never appear on it.

The name escapes me but its certainly not a secret.

Anthorn

Just to add what SimonSays says, banks would not operate a black list pertaining to "the average joe" because it's not in their best interests: Circumstances change and the banks know that.

GingerBob_3

meer53 wrote: »

Having won £20m on the lottery is no guarantee you will get an account.

I bet you would though.

tinkerbell28

gunsandbanjos wrote: »

I'm pretty sure it's well known (well to others, not you it would seem) that non credit based blacklists do exist.

So I've not said anything that isn't known already. I'm simply not giving any details away to lay persons such as yourself and whoever else might be reading, as that wouldn't be sensible.

You count coins...you're not in MI5 for heavens sake.

gunsandbanjos

tinkerbell28 wrote: »

You count coins...you're not in MI5 for heavens sake.

That's funny, that is all bank people do. Oh wait, nope not touched a coin in my job as I don't work in branch.

gunsandbanjos

Whiner wrote: »

Why? No one is going to work out who you are just from your username.

This smacks of "Look what I know that you don't know!!!".

Sad.

Not at all, I simply mentioned non credit based blacklists to exist to clarify a point I was making. Then some idiot jumped on it like a dog with a freaking bone demanding I supply proof:rotfl: therefore my reply was probably a bit more off than I would usually write but only because I wanted to make clear that I wasn't going to say anymore detail about it.

Frankly I don't care anymore, believe me or not, whatever:cool:

BillJones

gunsandbanjos wrote: »

So you think people can merrily defraud banks and these institutions shouldn't be allowed to have a list of the perpetrators so they don't deal with them again? :rotfl::rotfl:

There are posters on here who really do believe this, and who'll argue that it's a bank's responsibility to work out for themselves if a customer is a good risk.

Of course, when the banks do that by using an agency, we've gone full circle...