UK banks add new clause

Here it comes Halifax Loyds et all, have sent letters to customers informing them of a new condition if the Banking system undergoes a crisis. They will freeze restrict or do whatever they deem fit to your account. If you can't get cash then there cannot be any mass withdrawal of funds that is a run. Most people don't seem to have noticed or it is just being treated as yet another "Oh well" moment. We can see that the western economy has been on oxygen since the GFC now it looks like they will be stopping life support. The timing is that of the many signals that point to an end-of-September reset. www.bitchute.com...

a reply to: anonentity

your post are always spot on

keep it up my good friend

ATS is alive because of you

seems clear they are thinking that digital money is about to become worthless and the entire west collapses soviet union style..

if they steal everyone money then quid pro quo none of their credit cards, loans & mortgages will be repaid.. none of the utilities get paid and no one buys the crap on offer and the state collapses into a void.

in that void the people will start creating their own currencies to survive, so they even lose control of that.. 1000 years ago my town like many others had its own mints, mine had 4, its also why when the locals get rebellious they create their own money and stamps..eg the Lewes pound (eqiv £1) the cuckoo (eqiv 1p)

people being people they'll start sorting out their own solutions to the basics, food, heating, even power and obviously sorting out those they perceive caused the crisis.. as a society it'll be one they know and something like per industrial artisan society.

rather nwo it'll be another period of the anarchy..

though not sure how the city folk will cope as they have to rebuild* being the market place the artisan traders want comes to sell their wares..

by rebuild i do mean knock down and clear space..

I can't think of a worse move for the establishment as it ranks up there with the lockdowns as self inflicted harm..

a reply to: anonentity

Thanks for passing this on, Anon.

September seems like a fast-moving month, for me. Lots of changes and things to think about - especially Bidens speech and the Trump fiasco.

I keep reading comments on different sites warning about September 24; one was about planetary alignments, the sun, and an EMP taking out the grid. Another was a run on the banks, I think. I always make note when people 'sense' something and give a date- mainly for my own research. (Very, very few 'predictions' materialize.) The 24th will most likely be another nothing burger, but I'll be sure to watch the news.

a reply to: nugget1

its near the 30th anniversary of black Wednesday..

the noise I've heard is this time it risks being an event that encompasses the entire west..

as we move from resource war to currency war..

The timing is right, Oct 1st is the beginning of the governments new fiscal year.

a reply to: nickyw
Bankers, Rothschild's the lot will be hung

Here's what it said In the changes my bank have made

We've added a new condition that says if it's necessary, due to economic circumstances that affect the banking industry, we may restrict the amount you can have in your accounts either by applying a limit or by imposing a charge. If we have to do this and it applies to your account, we’ll write to you with more information

a reply to: anonentity

Firstly, I have had no communication from either of my banks regarding this. I can say that if this is going to be a clause that is used across the spectrum of western banking then it is more a positive security measure that will benefit all of us by preventing the public causing an economic meltdown catastrophe by knee jerking, paranoia and manipulation by propaganda that outside competitors and state adversaries might try to use as part of cold warfare.

We have seen what has happened in the Lebanon. If you search "public looting of banks" you will see that banks are not necessarily the bad guy and the public the good guy. I would never personally call the public good. I know what a dangerous weapon the public can be in the wrong hands.

This clause is actually a security measure if it is actually a clause that is to be applied to all westerrn banking. Such protective measures would prevent people from causing an economic collapse. When the ocean gets rough we have to ride it out. There is no alternative. We will sink and drown if we don't. That is no alternative at all to end up at the bottom of the ocean.

Think about this! Is it really an attack on the public or the authorities making sure we don't do something stupid like the Lebanon has done?

Everything must be accounted for in finance. A penny lost is a loss and it can never come back. I don't know why we think the public is somehow the good guy? You/we are not. We can be terribly chaotic and are incredibly naive as a mass, prone to manipulation at the drop of a hat. In Britain if there was a referendum they would want to bring back hanging and watch it in the town squares. There is still too much collective barbarian in us that seems to come out in mass behaviour particularly and that is when it is most dangerous and raises beasts like Hitler from the pit.

Unfortunately the public are not yet evolved enough to be totally trusted to think before they act. The tabloids exist because the public wants them to.

Stop jumping the gun and thinking everything that happens is to make you the victim and that somehow you are the righteous and they the criminal. Look at all you have in your lives. You are rich and that happened because those who are looking after the western economies are the kindest and most humanitarian, the most distributing of their wealth in this insane delusion of a world. It doesn't look like it sometimnes, but that is the reality. Check out the real situation!

Finally, remember what Christ said about who owns the money we use. It has Caesar's head on it metaphorically. That is who it belongs to. It doesn't have your head on it, mine neither. Bitcoin didn't have your head on it. It belonged to somebody. Do you think that somebody cared about you like the authorities do or would ever? I DO NOT. It was full of criminals and greedy people who would have sold their mother for its value to increase. There was no social conscience about it what so ever. It was a monster and parasite, sucking the blood of finance and terribly polluting of the environment. That is why I keep playing the authority game, because it works.

a reply to: anonentity

If an individual decided to hold on to stuff, that would be classed as hoarding and mental illness. If the stuff belongs to someone else, that would be handling stolen goods and a crime.

In my view, banks and governments believe all our wealth, everything we are, all our labour, our achievements, belong to them, to squander as they will.

When I see food inflation in the UK running at 45%+ on basic items and a useful focus for fear, blame and hate, I see big retail maximising their stash and wonder why they suddenly need to do that.

Perhaps the 'great' reset that is eminent and the allocation of credits? The more you have, the more you will get? The banks plan to grab the lions share?

BURN BABYLON BURN

Is the only source you can find for this a bitchute video that is based on a tiktok video?

It's going to need a bit more credibility for me to be concerned and I've heard nothing about this over here other than this post.



a reply to: anonentity

a reply to: nonspecific
New unfair Halifax bank account condition — MoneySavingExpert Forum:
forums.moneysavingexpert.com...

This is a complete non story.

The clause clearly says that they may choose to impose a limit to the amount of money you can have in your bank account and if you choose to have more there may be a charge.

Its not an issue.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: nonspecific
New unfair Halifax bank account condition — MoneySavingExpert Forum:
forums.moneysavingexpert.com...

a reply to: anonentity

This isn't really new though, it's just a change in the wording for existing rules that they have in place to prevent a run on a bank.

Things like this exist to prevent banks from collapsing. If the banks collapse it's the ordinary savers who suffer the most.

originally posted by: nonspecific
This is a complete non story.

The clause clearly says that they may choose to impose a limit to the amount of money you can have in your bank account and if you choose to have more there may be a charge.

Its not an issue.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: nonspecific
New unfair Halifax bank account condition — MoneySavingExpert Forum:
forums.moneysavingexpert.com...

Do you understand how fractional reserve lending works? It sounds like you don't, and if you missed that memo you're too far out of the loop to be participating in this conversation.

This policy implies negative interest rates are being applied at the bank level, soon to be passed down to the bank account level.

That's a huge issue for anyone who works for money, or spends money.

a reply to: AaarghZombies
What does 'a run on a bank' mean?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

A bank run amounts to when large groups of depositors/account holders withdraw their money from banks at the same time based on fears that the bank will become insolvent.

The concern being the sum of people's fears becomes the reality of the situation.

a reply to: andy06shake
Is that what the 'new clause' is saying though?

It appears to say that you will be charged for having too much money in the bank.....or am I wrong?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Im honestly not sure Itisnowagain.

At a quick glance, and as to the information available, it seems the idea is to prevent bank runs from becoming a problem.

Hardly inspires confidence all the same.

a reply to: andy06shake

we may restrict the amount you can have in your accounts either by applying a limit or by imposing a charge.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

So If you got 100k in the bank and they say you are only allowed 10k

What happens to the 90k?