It was reported that the Labour Government has announced new rules aimed at preventing potential de-banking situations.

As we have previously explained, the issue of “de-banking” has received growing public attention in the UK, particularly following high-profile cases, such as that of Nigel Farage.

However, for many individuals, being denied access to essential financial services is far from headline news – it’s an everyday struggle.

Throughout 2023 and 2024, and following several high-profile “de-banking” cases, we published various blogs chartering the developments in this area; this culminated in our blog: 2024: a year in de-banking:

2024年：“被取消银行服务”现象的年度回顾

In this latest blog, we explore why we still believe that the new rules don’t go far enough.

What are the proposed new rules?

Broadly, the proposed new rules will extend the notice period a bank must give to close a customer’s account (i.e. de-bank a customer) from the current two months to 90 days.

Additionally, the new proposed rules will provide more transparency on the bank’s decision-making process by requiring the banks to, in the right circumstances, give more reasons for their decisions to de-bank a customer.

Ultimately, the changes remain similar to those we highlighted in our March 2024 article on this topic:

防止被拒绝银行服务的拟议新法律是什么？

Why we still believe the new rules don’t go far enough

As we have previously explained, although the new rules will further address the unfairness of some de-banking decisions, the whole approach to the provision of access to an adequate bank account and banking facilities needs to be radically reconsidered, so that it becomes akin to a fundamental right, rather than something that can be offered (and taken away) at the whim of the banks.

NAVIGATING FINANCIAL INSTITUTION-RELATED CHALLENGES

Bank Account closures or “de-banking”

We have previously written about how other issues individuals may face, including account closures, are not limited to political figures in the UK, and may affect many thousands of lawful individual and business customers every year.  These cases have exposed the difficult balance many financial institutions and their individual and business customers must strike to gain and maintain access to basic banking services. 

To assist those whose accounts have been closed, Gherson’s financial crime, investigations and regulatory team have previously written blogs titled:

• “Why has my bank account been closed”
• “Why has my business bank account been closed?”
• “140,000 SMEs “de-banked” last year – why could I have been de-banked?”
• “What are the proposed new laws aimed at preventing de-banking?”
• “Why the proposed new laws to try and prevent de-banking to not go far enough”. 
• “Am I entitled to a basic bank account in the UK?”

Adverse Information on Compliance Databases

We are also being approached by individuals who feel that incorrect and/or inaccurate data about them stored in compliance databases is having an adverse effect on their relationship with financial institutions, causing them subsequent issues, such as bank account closures or difficulties in opening a bank account.

We have also written a series of blogs on a basic overview of the main functions of compliance databases like World-Check and how you can correct information about yourself on such databases?

Could a CIFAS Marker be affecting my ability to obtain financial services?

We are increasingly approached by individuals who have been adversely affected by a CIFAS marker and want advice on how to remove this. 

In some scenarios, the CIFAS marker against the individual would have been added wrongly, and being in this unfair situation can have a hugely detrimental effect due to the wide-ranging, complex and adverse consequences for the individual affected.

In a previous blog we examine what a CIFAS marker is and how to try and get it removed.

In a later blog, we examined what are the next steps after a bank and CIFAS have refused by complaint. 

Updated: 1 May 2025

HOW GHERSON CAN ASSIST

Gherson’s regulatory, white-collar and investigations team are highly experienced in advising on what you can do if your bank freezes or closes your account.  This includes assisting you in submitting a request under data protection legislation, otherwise known as a Data Subject Access Request, to ascertain what information banks and other financial institutions may be holding on you and their decision-making, as well as analysing the response and assisting with any appropriate challenges.

If you have any questions arising from this blog, please do not hesitate to contact us for advice; send us an email at enquiries@gherson.co.uk or, alternatively, follow us on X, Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn to stay up to date with the latest developments.

The information in this blog is for general information purposes only and does not purport to be comprehensive or to provide legal advice.  Whilst every effort is made to ensure the information and law is current as of the date of publication it should be stressed that, due to the passage of time, this does not necessarily reflect the present legal position.  Gherson accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from accessing or reliance on information contained in this blog.  For formal advice on the current law please do not hesitate to contact Gherson.  Legal advice is only provided pursuant to a written agreement, identified as such, and signed by the client and by or on behalf of Gherson.

©Gherson 2025