Financial institutions around the world employ the same techniques in market trading as Navinder Sarao. They should be prosecuted as well, and first before prosecuting an individual like Navinder Sarao. In addition, due to the length of time the extradition proceedings are likely to take and the difficulty of the US being able to convince a judge that they do have a case, keeping him in prison is cruel and inhuman. He must be freed on minimum bail and surrender his passport instead.

The Austerity programme the last coalition Government implemented, has hit the poorest and most vulnerable in our society the hardest. You might have noticed that the economic crisis and the recession have left a massive hole in the UK’s public finances. Frontline services and jobs are at risk. Many other developed and developing countries face a similar struggle. The financial sector is responsible for a big part of the mess we're in. So our merry band of hundreds of thousands of Robin Hood supporters believe that banks, hedge funds and the rest of the sector should pay their fair share to clear up the mess they helped create. For more information, use the link. http://www.robinhoodtax.org.uk/

For quick and easy resolution of complaints about banks etc in a fair manner.

This graph shows what people think wealth distribution is, what they think it should ideally be, and what it actually is in reality. https://ugc.futurelearn.com/uploads/images/4d/3f/hero_4d3f4dc3-dad3-4424-836a-95d1823c32e4.jpg Open University Inequality Briefing 2013. © Copyright 2015 FutureLearn The poorest in society are paying for the mistakes of the Banks and unfair Government policy. Austerity cuts are aimed at the poorest in society but the cuts affect the quality of life of all of us. This includes the cuts to Welfare, Public Services, and the recently announced sell off affordable rented accommodation in the Housing Association sector. We are NOT all in this together. N.B. OECD figures show that since 1979 the top 1% of population have increased their wealth from 9% to 23% of the total. The bottom 20% have reduced to 0.6% of the wealth. Top rate of tax in 1978 was 83% now it is a flat 40%. OECD figures also prove that the less inequality in a society, the more successful it is economically.

According to Citizens UK the wages of supermarket workers are being topped up by £11 billion each year in benefits. For too long supermarkets have been underpaying their staff & expecting the tax payer to foot the bill but now is time to fight back. Supermarkets turn over billions of pounds every year & are easily in the position to pay the living wage & if they were to do so would save this country £11 billion every year. Imagine where that £11 billion could go - NHS, Police, Fire Service, Education to name a few. While our public services are being drained of resources huge billion pound, multi-national companies are being subsidised by us the tax payer, it must now stop to save our economy & our public services The living wage is set at £9.15 in London & £7.85 elsewhere & is calculated according to the basic cost of living in the UK - that's right, the basic cost of living. All employers should be paying the living wage but supermarkets have the moral right to do so as they employ such a large number of employees (5 million) & turn over such masses of money. It's important to remember as well that this isn't just the big 4 who are guilty, those with a smaller market share must also accept responsibility - particularly the Co-operative whose morals & ethics were built on challenging greed & dispersing money back into society 170 years ago facebook.com/blocuk twitter.com/ukbloc

Many investors from 2007 were conned into buying properties that were fraudulently over-valued by third party professionals, including property developers, panel surveyors, mortgage brokers and conveyancing solicitors, all part of a scam to fleece money from high street lending institutions. The high street lenders have repossessed many of the properties which have so far seen millions of pounds lost in shortfalls on the original mortgages. These shortfalls have been 'lost' in the accounts of the Lloyds Group and UK tax-payers should be told in detail how much all this amounts to and what steps the group has taken to recover these shortfalls. Lloyds has protected itself by repossessing the houses of the investors who fell foul of what a member of Lloyds' Chief Executive Team termed as a 'scam', in a letter to one investor, it then repossessed. The investor had written to challenge the bank's conduct in the whole saga that saw three of her properties re-possessed to the tune of £530,000. In its reply, the bank's official wrote: 'I disagree that BoS should be accountable for the shortfall as we were also victims of the scam.' There are at least 22 properties in the north and north-west of England, which were all over-valued by between £100,000 and £150,000, involving investors that have been forced into repossession. Third-party professionals used by Lloyds on a daily basis have fleeced the group for millions. Lloyds meanwhile, has been able to 'write off' these 'bad debts' with no comeback or explanation on its behaviour. British taxpayers shored up the ailing Lloyds Group, following the disastrous and scandalous way it operated its business in the lead up to the 'credit crunch' in 2008. The public need to know exactly how the losses - in the region of £3.2 million - from this 'scam' were reported and whether Lloyds reported the 'scam' to the Police or any of the financial watchdogs and authorities. Bank of Scotland were made aware of the 'scam' in May 2008. It is now December 2017 and the Lloyds Group has not addressed any of the questions raised by investors about its handling of the situation and hides behind jargon, data protection and its solicitors, Eversheds. In the meantime, Lloyds continues to hand out 'performance' bonuses in the tens of millions to a raft of senior management, whilst it has taken no action in delving into the 'scam' that it said it was a 'victim' of. How shameful that it has not had the decency to work with the investors/borrowers involved in the 'scam' it too was involved in, other than to repossess their homes and push them into untold stress and misery! Come clean Bank of Scotland - face up to the situation like the rest of us do when times get tough!

Year after year landlords and Councils have increased rents by at least 4%. This year many are levying 4% increases at a time when many ordinary people - 'hard working families' to use politician speak, are on minimum wage and who have not had a wage rise in 2 years. Private landlords and local Councils are proactively making people poorer as expenses increase and income remain stagnant. Just recently The Royal Bank of Scotland, that was bailed out by tax payers, has defended plans to pay £588m in staff bonuses despite suffering an £8.24bn loss in 2013 as it slumped into the red for the sixth successive year. Ross McEwan, its Chief Executive, is expected to earn £2.7m for simply doing a job he was brought in to do. However, the bank is still in the red, so he hasn't achieved the goal, yet he still receives more money in bonuses than most people earn in a lifetime. Barclays increased bonuses by 10% to £2.4bn. HSBC said it would increase salaries for its bosses to get around a European union cap on bonuses. Are we going to swallow this silently? We clearly are not 'all in this together'. Perhaps the worst offenders are those local Councils who are taking the easy option and passing on the costs of their central government funding shortfall to those in social housing and those who have to pay council tax - those who have the least ability to pay and do anything about the increase. It is sickening to hear politicians speaking about raising people out of poverty yet allowing this activity to continue.

Every man deserves a second chance to live happy and to prosper, it is the role of government to provide the conditions that allow man to do just that. Many cases where ccj's etc have occurred is simply because, of failing governments failing to recognize that they themselves are the root cause to much of the bad debt and as a consequence of their bad decision making from all sectors, society as a whole indeed suffers. Access to credit to create wealth must be made for everyone. Not everyone is bad and many suffer as a consequence. Humankind is entitled to a better standard of living. When the government demands a significant proportion of a mans wage, there is very little left for the man to prosper. We need change and we need it now. If the government removes its stealth taxes, then perhaps man can flourish and his family prosper, this will not happen and cannot happen when every door that is knocked on is closed for you unless you have a bank balance of a million pounds. The distribution of wealth is not fairly being played as the wealth is consumed by banks that are unwilling to give credit where credit is due and if the government really want to be in touch with the common man, then it must aid the common man or forever be hated by the common man.

I personally feel, rightly or wrongly, that if British Telecom were allowed to buy the 'Everything Everywhere' company, it would be like Tesco's buying Morrison's or Sky buying I.T.V. We need a competitive market place to create employment and drive consumers standards to higher grounds. The reaching long term implications of this potential sale, would have to result in job losses and if the public does not raise it's concerns about potential huge company sales such this and similar situations and attempts like it, we could be guilty of scratching our heads in 5 years time and asking ourselves "Where did all the work go?" In the last 3 years, I have found B.T. and E.E's customers standards to be poor and if they become no longer in direct competition with each other, how will their customer services ever improve? We are still recovering from a double-dip recession and the last thing the business market needs is an eventual streamlining of a big phone network. This must be stopped and it is in all of our interests to stop B.T. buying E.E. I have already contacted my M.P, Andrew Turner, about this matter and hope that others are able to find the time to contact their M.P. too.

Pensioners who have made a life outside the UK's list of "Recognised Countries" are being denied their human rights to receiving their full pensions. The UK doesn't mind sending UK citizens to Thailand or other far flung countries to fight and die for them, but if god forbid any of them choose to return and live there, their pensions are either stopped or frozen without the benefit of cost of living increases. At the very beginning of our working lives, and at 10 year intervals. We should be given a list of countries we can expect NOT to receive our pensions.

This will save the average consumer around £180 to £200 per year as many (myself included) only have a fixed phone line service into my house because I have to in order to make it possible for broadband to be delivered. In many cases, the phone service is more expensive than the broadband. There is absolutely no technical reason why this service could not be turned off and as long as there is a copper pair into the property, the broadband will still work as well as it does now. We are effectively being held to ransom by telcos if we want fixed line broadband. This also affects most domestic, so called "fibre optic" broadband as this service is still delivered to the property over the copper wires. Whilst we cannot realistically expect that the provision and maintenance of the copper network can be carried out for free, Ofcom should look at what is fair pricing for the provision of a "naked" copper pair with only broadband provided over it and the removal of the obligation to have a fixed landline telephone service to the home as a large percentage would prefer to remove this option if they were given the choice.

For too long politicians from all the major parties have publically stated they would not sell or privatise areas of public spending on the run up to elections, only to then do so once they are in office. They clearly cannot be trusted. If any area of PUBLIC spending is going to be privatised, then it should be THE PUBLIC who decide, not politicians. It should be the public who have the last say on the matter. If it is the PUBLIC's money that is going to spent, then it should be the PUBLIC who decides how it should be spent.