> >> Alison I have just spoken to my next door neighbours daughter who works in a bank and >she says that there are special exceptions.
> >
> > Problem is triggering them. In most cases you need some kind of hold
> > over the bank such as having a large existing deposit you can threaten
> > to withdraw. For something like WMUK 2.0 saying no is the easy option
> > so they are going to do that unless you are a complete walk through in
> > terms of meeting requirements.
>
> It strikes me that the first and most pressing objective of the board
> should be to obtain charitable status, for which, as we have seen so
> clearly, a bank account is necessary. Accepting directors aged under
> 18 (and therefore without credit ratings) seems likely to place
> additional obstacles in the path towards charitable status.
>
> I agree that having directors of 16 or 17 would be a "nice to have".
> I don't think it's important enough to compromise the most important
> aim of the project.
>

I would have to agree with Sam Korn. What i would suggest is this. Firstly
have people over 18 year olds, and that meet all requirements get the bank
account. Then after everything is dealt with, we can then look towards
having 16 and 17 year old directors in the future. I do feel that it is in the best
interests of WMUK not to have 16/17 year old directors at this time. We have
enough problems to deal with at this moment in time as an unfortunate result of
the way UK banking works, we don't need to add to those difficulties. I hope
you understand this :)
 
Seddon

---

Try Facebook in Windows Live Messenger! Try it Now!