Talk:Child & Co./Archives/2013

Dead link

The external link detailing the company's history is dead and needs to be replaced with:-

http://www.rbs.com/content/about_us/our_heritage/our_history/our_banking_family/present_day/downloads/Childs.pdf

 Done Astronaut (talk) 01:22, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Branch Name or Bank

I see that Vanasan added a intro to state that Child is simply a 'Branch Name' this was done following a discussion on an edit on his article on 'Oldest Banks'. Fraankly, this is underhand. I suggest that following the link in the article to RBS's own website no where does it state this. Child is as much an independent bank as is NatWest which is as a wholey owned subsidiary of RBS. Child was never integrated into Williams Deacon nor into Williams Glynn. I believe the independence is due to it being a funder of the London Clearing House Committee. Tony S 212.139.239.216 (talk) 11:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

It is the Royal Bank of Scotland that on their official website refers to this entity as one of their branches in London, and the building where the branch is found is only designated "RBS – The Royal Bank of Scotland", not Child & Co. A bank that is completely owned by another bank, that is referred to as a branch by its owners (not an independent bank), that doesn't have a building designated "Child & Co.'", that doesn't even have an independent presence on the Internet, only a brief mention on the page where you can find various RBS branches, isn't an independent bank. Vanasan (talk) 04:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I am looking at a legal instrument called a 'cheque'. It is necessary in the UK to state what this instrument is and by what institution it is issued by. It is a HSBC cheque - it clealry states that it is to be issued on an accout of HSBC at a branch called 'London Bridge Branch'. I am looking now at another such instrument. It says that it is issued by 'NatWest' - 'National Westminster Bank plc', issued for an account at 'Bishopsgate Branch'. A third states 'Barclays' 'Oxford Circus Branch'. Another cheque - 'RBS - Royal Bank of Scotland' issued for an account at 'London Mayfair Branch'. Finally a cheque for 'Child & Co Bankers' 1 Fleet Street, London EC4Y 1BD'. I hpe you are not proposing that somehow this non-branch is pretending to be a Bank which would clearly be a breach of the law. Tony S 212.139.230.134 (talk) 22:59, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but personal anecdotes are not acceptable sources. On this website the Financial Services Authority states that "Child & Co." is a brand name used by the "FSA authorised institution" "Royal Bank of Scotland plc"; that is, Child & Co. is a brand of the Royal Bank of Scotland plc. Seemingly, the Royal Bank of Scotland plc. doesn't even use the brand name very actively, as there is only a big "RBS – Royal Bank of Scotland" sign over their door and they don't even have an independent web presence, only a very short mention on the RBS website where it is explicitly referred to as an RBS "branch". There is no independent FSA authorised institution known as Child & Co. and there is not even an RBS branch with the appearance of being an independent bank. Vanasan (talk) 13:33, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The informatiion above is not an 'anecdote' I was reading from the actual chaeques in front of me contributed by members as payment of a social club that I am secretary of. I note that you ignored each of the other arguments put forward which contradict your position; ie not a branch but a separate bank, as evidenced by cheques, Child & Co is a seperate legal entity unlike a 'branch'; it is being kept quite separate from the sale of the English RBS Branches for that legal reason - why is it that you think Coutts and Natwest are independent banks on your criteria of excluding Child?. Child is a wholey owned subsidiary and has separately appointed Directors as a separate company. Because of its age and its status none of those other parental banks have sought to extinguish this; but you have decided to on a dogmatic application of opinion which is not coherent with your own criteria. That RBS is in turmoil as part of the banking crisis and has not got a clear strategy of "what to do with it" (that is an anecdote of a conversation with a senior manager there that I had recently when one of my members arranged for a direct cash withdrawal by presenting a cheque to me for that purpose) and that for convenience it is referred to as a 'branch' on the website you refer to which is simply 'the branch locator' is not an evidence of anything you are trying to prove. Please engage with the evidence of independence as shown by me and explain what it the difference? Tony S85.210.2.31 (talk) 11:27, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I think it is technically a branch, but it does issue its own cheques, it does have its own bank card and it does have its own branded brach in fleet street!

There are two Child and co. brass plaques either side of the door with others inidicating 'marigold bank' etc.

All the staff inside wear child and co uniforms and name tags etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.158.28 (talk) 14:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

-Is it just me, or is the phrase "financial institutions" a bit rich? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.194.92 (talk) 07:47, 16 October 2013 (UTC)