Honestly, not a shill. I feel for the pastor. I just happen to know how these things work and how the big banks operate. There isn't a blacklist, but there are restricted industries and legitimate reasons for the bank to exit a relationship.
For liability and client confidentiality reasons, the bank will never divulge the reason. It is always a "business decision". The real reason could be any number of a hundred reasons.
The most common reason why banks exit relationships with their business clients is for economic reasons. Meaning, the bank doesn't want to sustain further losses, or managing the relationship is literally too costly. For example, if a client is habitually late on their payments and they are about to take a nosedive, the local lender will work to exit the relationship and the client will have to find funds from a higher risk lender, like a community bank or factoring company. It's no different than any other business arrangement where people want to do business with others that are compatible and agreeable.
Sometimes it is a mix of factors. The client is taking a nosedive, maybe screamed and yelled at the local banker, and the local banker had enough of the client's shenanigans. Not all clients are warm and fuzzy. Many can be quite nasty and blame the bank for everything under the sun even when the bank is NOT at fault.
The bottom line is that we are only hearing one side of the story. I assure you that if you heard the bank's side of the story, that there are VERY legitimate reasons why they are exiting.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77049813 I've been the victim of bank account closure and I can definitively tell you there is a black list or at a minimum certain people "make calls" to your banks. The banks have access to the security apparatus. Central banks control the security apparatus because they literally own the government. Banking, telecommunications and transportation are all controlled by this system. Medical and food are next.
I think we may be talking about 2 different things here...possibly. Yes, there is a blacklist used by all banks for depositors that stiff a bank, which then makes it really difficult for that depositor to open a new checking account at another bank.
For example, you have a $25,000 overdraft in your account and you never bring the account current. The bank charges-off the $25,000 and reports this information to other banks so that they are aware of what happened and to be cautious opening a checking account for you at different bank.
That's actually a legitimate practice, not really any different than trade reporting on credit bureaus for vendors and suppliers to businesses. If your company stiffs a supplier, then that will hit the trade bureaus so other suppliers know not to do business with you unless you pay up front.
I don't know enough about what happened to you in your case, or even in the case in this thread, for the simple fact of the matter that we don't have and will never know the facts.
I will say that the LGBTQ agenda and advocacy is big-time involved with the big banks. I would be surprised if a bank would close down a relationship on that factor alone, however. That's actually pretty unlikely. It's probably more like the bank was taking financial losses on the client, combined with the client being unreasonable to deal with, and someone made a business decision to pull the plug.
Again, it is usually their assigned Officer at the bank that is the ultimate decision=maker, because that Officer gets paid on profitability. And Officers of the bank are under huge pressure to hit quotas and be profitable. Any business that is hurting profitability will get heightened scrutiny - and even exiting if it gets really bad.
