"Mike_B" wrote in message
news:hVN8Ua8Zh35HFw7T@localhosts.net...
> In message <64pbd8F2bu39lU1@mid.individual.net>, "tim (not at home)"
> writes
>>
>>"Alang" wrote in message
>>news:esseu3539b5phenekqa48uf234eof507bt@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:27:11 +0100, "tim \(not at home\)"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Alang" wrote in message
>>>>news:09bdu3dfu578msj8r50t2hnc74vjhu9g5g@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:43:52 +0000, Cynic
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:05:37 +0000, Alang
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>But do you know of any legal UK resident who would *not* be able to
>>>>>>>>get a bank account?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have heard of instances where banks have refused to open accounts
>>>>>>>for some people. Those who can't produce proofs required or who have
>>>>>>>been in debt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The former is true - but any legal resident of the UK can get the
>>>>>>required ID without a lot of trouble, so it does not amount to a bar
>>>>>>on getting an account. The second is simply not true these days.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is true. While banks may *offer* accounts to those who can't
>>>>> produce proofs it is often the case that staff in the front line
>>>>> aren't aware and turn people away who don't conform to a standard
>>>>> check list. Many banks will not supply accounts for undischarged
>>>>> bankrupts and often discharged ones too. What they say they do and
>>>>> what they actually do are not the same.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Many banks offer a "basic account" that is open to everyone, including
>>>>>>bankrupts. It carries no interest or overdraft facilities, but issues
>>>>>>a debit card and allows all the common banking features - cheque, BAC,
>>>>>>DD etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not always.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ISTR a couple of posts here on that subject. Some of
>>>>>>>this thread claims millions without bank accounts. The report
>>>>>>>published in 2006 claims i in 12 households with no bank account. I
>>>>>>>have no idea whether that is correct today but I suspect the figures
>>>>>>>may still be in the millions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>From what I gather, the "1 in 12" figure was taken from a selected
>>>>>>subset of society rather than the whole of society.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing I see here to say that
>>>>> http://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/banking_benefits-3
>>>>
>>>>The point is that, most of us find this figure not believable.
>>>
>>> So?
>>> Most of who?
>>> It's a realistic figure
>>
>>What, that there are 2 million households who live an entirely cash
>>existance when benefits are now paid directly into bank accounts?
>>
>>I don't find it the slightest bit believable. I can believe 2 million
>>adults, I can't believe, 2 million households.
>>
>
> I believe the original report talked about 2.8 million adults, now nearer
> to 2 million.
Which original report?
The only link I have seen any of the "believers" post, is the one to the CAB
website that is the one that I don't believe.
I'll say again. I can believe that there are 3 million adults without a
bank account. I cannot believe that this equates to one in 12 of
households. The jump from the first to the second, requires me to accept
that all of these non-bank account holding people live either: as a single
person household or in a two person household with another non-bank account
holding person (about 50% in each category) This is a lottery winning
probability. I think it far more likely that 60-70% of non-bank account
holders live with another who does have a Bank account.
tim
|