One of the things that rankles most of all is the super-patronising attitude that banks come up with whenever one suggests that maybe, just possibly, pretty please, their attitude to “name change” is neither founded in law, nor actually doing much good to prevent ID fraud or even to enhance security.
Their usual spluttered riposte is something along the lines of “we’re the experts: go away!”
Which is why the latest revelations leave ME spluttering with rage.
One of my (many) start points in resisting the bank’s Gadarene rush to demand documentation to “prove” one’s identity is the immense disrespect to the individual thereby done. “What business is it of theirs?” seems like a pretty good push back.
Still, they then trot out the security mantra, which is a total lie, since the procedures in place do nothing to enhance real security – though this is sadly bought into by many in the trans community, who don’t seem to get that this is an issue that affects WOMEN and not just them.
But lets re-run the question of why we can’t do the banks for fraud. Well, there was no obvious victim.
So there you have it. If no individual is directly affected by an action, there’s no crime. End of.
Which therefore pushes me back into the question of why it is that they get away with imposing a load of discriminatory conditions on the trans community and women, when there is little suggestion that name change on its own is an especial source of crime – but steadfastly resist all calls for their own behaviour to be policed, because there are no individual victims.
I think we should be told – not least, how far this principle runs through other areas of law. Speeding down a deserted road late at night? Sure…its a TECHCNICAL breach of the law…but there is no victim and no chance of one.
So surely it can’t be anything like as bad as where an individual mows down half a school crocodile after ten pints on a friday morning?
Or even indecent exposure. To, ever so slightly, corrupt Bishop Berkeley: if you expose yourself in a wood and there’s no-one there…have you really exposed yourself?
Nope. This is a rum principle, without a doubt.