Skip to content or view screen version

Campaigners Take Action Against Mainstream Banks

Amanda Walters | 14.03.2012 18:12 | Education | Health | Public sector cuts

Residents and students close their accounts with high-street banks in protest of the financial crisis caused by the banks.

Student cutting her Lloyds card after closing account
Student cutting her Lloyds card after closing account


Campaigners and local residents of Manchester went to Market Street on Wednesday 14th of March at 1pm to move their money from mainstream banks to more ethical banking systems.

Following the national Move Your Money campaign, launched in London, Manchester campaigners have run workshops to promote ethical banking with the aim of raising awareness and providing alternatives. Many customers are angry at their current banks due to the recent recession starting in 2008, the direct result of a financial crisis caused by the gambling of an irresponsible cartel of banks. Customers who no longer want to support banks that caused the crisis and have no genuine ethical investment policies can act against them and send a signal to the market by moving money to more ethical alternatives of banking such as credit unions, ethical banks and building societies.

Stephen William, MP is supporting Move Your Money UK:

“I support Move Your Money UK’s campaign to tackle excessive remuneration and short-termism in the British banking system using consumer power to ensure it serves the needs of our society. We need more mutual, local and ethical financial institutions to challenge the dominance of the big four banks.”

Jamie Audsley, 28, a teacher and community worker who lives in West Norwood closed his current account with RBS and cut up his bank card:

“I'm so frustrated that RBS, a bank owned by the taxpayer, is still not listening to us its shareholders or our elected representatives. That's why I've joined this campaign today to make them listen to us as customers.”

Amanda Walters
- e-mail: amanda.walters@manchester.ac.uk

Comments

Hide the following 3 comments

more risk is safer!

15.03.2012 12:45

Small credit unions arn't too big to fail.
So they they won't get bailed out by the state if they fuck up.
So they will be careful not to fuck up.
But if they do fuck up, their investors will lose everything!
So they may want to grow bigger for safety.
But the bigger they get, the more risks they can afford to take, until they get too big to fail.
Small credit unions is how all the worlds biggest banks started.

Take away the state and on one will ever be too big to fail.
So the state caused the banking crisis.

The state will always be bound to the banks and the banks to the state, the state to the people and the state, the banks to the people and the people to the banks. It's a kind of evil trinity. Credit is one ugly mess. with it's lure of great riches, no one can ever bare to cast the golden ring into the fires of Morhdorh no matter how close they come and what ever they go through to get their ;)

anarchist


Not where their money comes from

15.03.2012 16:39

You are doing the big high street banks a favour with this type of action. They regard the small accounts as a pain in the neck if you really want to hurt them keep them open with just a few quid in the account they really hate that

Ex Nat West wage slave


Has anyone thought of collective action for 'frustration' by the banks

29.03.2012 16:24

I do have a question for you though, As the RBS caused the crash that we are experiencing now as admitted by Stephen Heston when interviewed by Robert Peston he said that "RBS was culpable". Does this mean that when the bank attempts to foreclose on mortgage defaulters who are in default directly because of the crash caused by RBS, is there a counteclaim possible due to 'Frustration' by the bank preventing the mortgagee from fulfilling there obligations. As the mortgagee has done nothing wrong but that the market has collapsed due to the actions of the various banks as is common knowledge and admitted by Stephen Heston in his talk to his staff where he said that "they had to diffuse the time-bomb of debt", "avoid extreme outcomes" and "take losses to clean up the past".
Your professional opinion would be appreciated. Plus, could a class action be taken against the banks in this vein?

ken
mail e-mail: kenmayo@hotmail.co.uk