Oh, what account? Don’t be a tease, I love a good bank account!
1 Like
You’ll just have to be patient!!! 
Needless to say, what I’ve done is nothing short of a grovelling u turn on a bank I’ve previously dumped quite some time ago! But, there’s free loot involved, so I’m going to forgive mysel 
Too modest . I’m sure what you’ve done can better be categorised as “an honest, informed product reappraisal”. 
2 Likes
Well yes, that’s probably a fair comment 
To be honest, I dumped the bank in 2018 but much has changed since then. I have a mortgage with the bank (via a broker) and I already use the banks app to view my mortgage product.
This does all involve a CASS of course and it’s a decision I’ve taken a while considering.
1 Like
Just because a company/other third party cannot prove the law has been broken themselves does not mean, that doesn’t mean the law has not, in fact, been broken.
You might legitimately determine the risk is low because of apathy on the part of both the organisation you’re defrauding and law enforcement, but if you do it on an application form you absolutely are obtaining goods or services by deception.
Regardless of the law lying to organisations you wish to have a long term financial relationship with about your financial means is a bad idea.
1 Like
And you certainly don’t have to be found guilty by a court of law to get an Application Fraud marker. And when you go to appeal with Cifas they will only look to see if you’ve intentionally misstated your income and a response of “YeS bUt CoMmOn LaW” won’t help.
4 Likes
As I alluded to in a previous post further back, I’m unsure as to why anyone would lie about their income when attempting to obtain financial products. Most individuals when they input their personal information into their application, their financial lives are subsequently laid bare during the hard search process. I guess some applications do go through but in any case, I personally have zero sympathy with individuals who absolutely blatantly lie or manipulate the facts for their own ends only to have their applications rejected or if they do get found out later, become subject to a fraud investigation.
1 Like
Copium, it’s natural that if there is an acquittal and it’s not a case of mistaken identity, there couldn’t have been a crime committed by an innocent party
Furthermore, instead of arguing w me you should just go read the act
I have, my interpretation differs from yours considerably.
Oh the beauty of common law
All 3 actions in the screenshot you posted are relevant.
A false representation is made, dishonestly (any judge or jury will have no trouble accept on the balance of probability anything other than a small variation is outside the bounds of an honest representation) - 1a
The purpose of that is to make gain for themselves 1.b.i. (i.e. have access to credit/card features that they believe they otherwise wouldn’t), and by exposing the lender to risk beyond that they may have the appetite for 1.b.ii.
Your perverse reading of the law is neither here nor there, a judge wouldn’t seek your opinion on whether you believe you have broken the law other than submitting a plea. This is a maturity thing, I used to read bits of law and believe I could theoretically workaround them by delivering my own interpretation… glad I never got to the point that was tested.
2 Likes
Quite aside from the law, and CIFAS, I think it’s incredibly unsmart to try and deceive financial institutions, particularly ones you really want to benefit from having relationships with moving forwards (like Amex).
Short term gain at the risk of lifetime bans. And even if it’s not Amex, this is the sort of stuff that can (and does) kill your chances of getting mortgages if one of these organisations you’ve burned bans you.
Going back to the original point - I see no evidence that Amex are applying these rules as conditions for holding the account, only for applying.
4 Likes
Well, we got there in the end. Having reached the point where personal slights are initiated then exchanged, it’s regrettable that the thread should be closed.
In retrospect, perhaps it should have closed when the conversation ceased to be entertaining.
(Taken the liberty of hiding a couple of posts - they wouldn’t look nice in the morning 
).
2 Likes