12 ways Nationwide has biased an election of 9.3 million peopleĀ against me – and some notable 1sts (š„) along the way

12 ways Nationwide Building Society has biased the 2026 election with an electorate of 9.3 million peopleĀ against me – and some notable š„Firsts along the way.
1. Using the #QuickVote when there is a Member Nominated Candidate on the Ballot.
Aš„First for Nationwide, maybe for all Building Societies?
There hasn’t been a Member Nominated Candidate standing for Election to the Board of Nationwide since it was introduced by Nationwide in 2006, the year after the last candidate, Alan Debenham stood for election for the last time in 2005.
AFAIK, there isn’t a single Member Nominated Director with a seat on the Board of any of the 42 remaining building societies in the UK. At one point in the 1990s, Nationwide had a quarter of its board seats occupied by Member Nominated Directors. The Co-operative Group has 4 MNDs, one of whom is currently serving as interim CEO after the CEO stepped down. Certain large pension schemes are required by law to allocate a third of the board seats to Member Nominated Directors or Trustees.
2. Using the QuickVote to generate āAgainstā votes.
Aš„First for Nationwide, Building Societies, Member Owned UK organisations that use the Quick Vote? I have asked Civica Election Services who run many of the AGMs for building societies and member organisations but they have refused to answer.
Note that Nationwide has made a far more prescriptive design choice than other building societies. In 2026 for example, Coventry Building Society has the Quick vote, but offers 3 check box options: ‘For all’, ‘Against all’, or ‘Withheld all’. Nationwide instead only offers a single check box in favour of the Board’s recommendations (which this year means ‘For’ resolutions 1-13, and ‘Against’ #14 i.e. me).
3. Stalling the communication of Board decisions about how the election will be conducted (I was told the Board would decide prior to Preliminary results on 21st May, however the Society didnāt communicate the decision until 28th May following concerns raised in the press.)Ā
Probably not a š„ First for Nationwide.Ā But as I don’t yet have access to the Board minutes, I don’t know. I’ve submitted a DSAR so hopefully this becomes apparent by 1 July 2026.
4. Issuing a āreactive media statementā the same day, attacking my suitability as a Board Director.Ā
Probably a š„First for Nationwide, and possibly for all building societies. See My counter to Nationwideās statements made today regarding my suitability issued that evening after some papers went to press without checking with me for my views.
5. Editing my Election Address without my permission, removing the sentence āLearn more at James4Nationwide.co.ukā in two separate locations and removing a QR code that links to the same. And not being transparent about it with Members within the footnote appended to my address without my permission, or with me as to the legal basis for doing so. (Iāve asked the FCA to investigate and, if appropriate, prosecute.)
Another š„ First for Nationwide to the best of my knowledge. See Member Nominated Candidate calls on FCA to review election fairness ahead of 2026 AGM voting form distribution.
6. Refusing a simple 18 word addition to my Election Address in light of the Boardās decision not to suspend the QuickVote, despite requesting this, and reiterating that request 5 times over 2 months, including at interview face-to-face with Board members, and making the same request the year before.Ā
Aš„ First for Nationwide I believe. See The Information I Wanted to Give Members Before They Vote.
7. Rejigging the order of candidates on the ballot paper so yours truly is the last resolution #14.
Not a š„First for Nationwide – see the Nationwide Guide to Voting in the 2003 AGM – the two Member Nominated Candidates were put at the end back then also.
8. Reformatting the Notice of AGM so the first 13 resolutions fit on page 1, and #14 (me) doesnāt make the front page.
Another š„ First for Nationwide, at least since 2021. See Does Nationwide 2026 AGM Voting Form Design Help Members Make an Informed Choice on How to Vote?
9. Not including a Member Nominated Candidate within the āWho are you voting for?ā pamphlet.
Another š„First for Nationwide. The pamphlet was introduced in 2023 – see the relevant section examining the change in design this year – Does Nationwide 2026 AGM Voting Form Design Help Members Make an Informed Choice on How to Vote?
10. Putting my Election Address in an entirely separate document, with 2 pages of text in front recommending Members vote āAgainstā me in 3 separate locations and giving subjective reasons as to my lack of suitability.
Another š„First for Nationwide. I’ve not seen an example like it, ever. See what you think for yourself: 2026 Member Nominated Candidate leaflet.
See also My counter to Nationwideās statements made today regarding my suitability.
11. Designing/choosing an electronic ballot system such that when you check the prominent Quick Vote option at the top of the ballot paper, the rest of the ballot paper is deleted and a Next button appears. (Think about that in the context of a mobile screen – I expect most people vote this way* and thus never see the ballot paper underneath.)
Definitely not a š„ First for Nationwide. The checking of the Quick vote box causing the Standard vote to disappear wasn’t definitely in place last year too: The Quick vote and 2025 Voting form.
* Iāve asked the question but neither Civica Election Services (the āindependent scrutineerā) or Nationwide have answered this, or many other pertinent questions: CES / Nationwide questions.
12. Choosing/designing a ballot such that if Members leave an item blank on the Voting Form, the Chairman (as the default Appointed Representative) will enter a āForā vote on any incomplete items 1-13 and āAgainstā me (item 14). If you donāt want to cast a vote either way, you must check āWithheldā.
Definitely not a š„First for Nationwide. But it probably didn’t have quite as much of an impact this year. See the below examples so you understand what’s going on:
- Scenario 1 – the voter chooses the quick vote – choice on page 1, confirmation on page 2
- Scenario 2 – the voter chooses to use the standard vote, voting opposite to the Board recommendation AND appoints their own representative (proxy) – choice on page 1, confirmation on page 2
- Scenario 3 – the voter chooses to use the standard vote, and votes alternately Against, For, Withheld and doesn’t record a vote, working down the page, The voter doesn’t appoint their own Representative (so it defaults to the Chairman). Note that the uncompleted rows chosen on page 1 produce a “Discretionary” result on page 2, allowing the Representative – in this case the chairman – to vote as he wishes instead (i.e. he will follow the Board recommendations to vote For on resolutions #1-13, and Against on #14 (me).
If you think any of this unjust, please consider:
š³ļø VOTING, but DO NOT USE THE QUICK VOTE.Ā See How to Vote for James.
š¢ Telling your networks about this. Anyone in your mobile or online banking Payee list with a sort code that starts 07-xx-xx is a Nationwide customer and likely able to vote. James4NW.com is a really short message and only 12 characters long.
š„ Subscribing for weekly email updatesĀ
š· Subscribing to my weekly mail list by Entering the Draw for your chance to win my šĀ£100 Random Share. Itās a free weekly draw from now until the AGM. T&Cs apply. Every person you refer gets you another entry in the free weekly prize draw. See the current Leaderboard.
šš§¢āļø Buying the DO NOT USE THE QUICK VOTE T-shirt, mug or hat from the Campaign Merch store. Every item purchased will generate Ā£2 for the campaign funds. *COMING SOON* Subscribe for updates š!
š¤ Or if you canāt bear the āFrankie Says Relaxā inspired design, or democratic mugs and caps with a simple universal slogan isnāt your thing, and youāre feeling flush, you could just donate to the James4Nationwide Campaign Crowdfunder.Ā
Alan gets it. Be more like Alan. Read my Election Address. Do your own research into the Board Members (all appointed by the Board itself) and their background and connections (I certainly am).Ā

As you certainly recognise, this isn’t just a Nationwide scandal ⦠it includes all of the ‘Big Five’ who are operating on pretty identical corporate playbooks. They use very imitation signature thresholds, silencers and a very similar āChairman Proxy Trapā to keep their boards an untouchable, exclusive club.”
Thank you for your support Alan – hopefully there will be more people like you who are curious and get stuck into the detail before casting their vote.
Please – everyone – tell your your network about this election. Turnout last year was less than 8% and there are 8.6 million people in the UK that didn’t vote last year.
As a newer member/customer I have no view on if you are appropriate to be on the board or not as I am simply not informed, but I recognise the issues you raise as legitimate and not fairly acknowledged by the board. Upon receiving my AGM pack this today it is clear there is significant bias against you and abuse of the quick vote system, which I’m surprised to learn (as with the non-approved purchase of Virgin Money) is apparently legal. I have chosen to vote inverse of the board recommendations, i.e. against 1-13 and for 14, to offset this bias. Clearly there needs to be regulation to bring member rights and protections in line with those of public shareholders etc. Thank you for raising awareness of these issues.
Thank you Eliza for your support and sharing your voting intention – I really appreciate you taking time to write and share this.
I’m planning to vote the same way as Eliza, but I’m dithering over whether to leave the Chair as my proxy or fill in your details. Is there a limit to how many people you can be a proxy for?
Hi Susan – you’re more than welcome to use my details. I asked CES & Nationwide this question:
3. An explanation of how your system will work if thousands of people appoint me as their representative ā are there any upper limits on what your system can handle? How will I process thousands of votes and individual preferences at the AGM?
… and this was their answer:
š” Society: āThere are no upper limits to the Civica voting system. When you login to the AGM you will be directed to see your individual information, which outlines the people who have appointed you as their representative.ā
I’ve been tracking the questions here: https://James4Nationwide.co.uk/CES
Thank you for your efforts – I have come across your work after I received the alert in the Nationwide app of the AGM. I agree with the points you raise and voted accordingly. I am writing to Nationwide with an official complaint.
Your supporters may be interested to read about the debate about virtual/hybrid AGMs in Germany. The German investor association does not favour virtual only AGMs – what does that say about Nationwideās AGM ?
Keep up the good work and good luck!
Thank you Murray – for your support and your vote.
Please do forward the info re German virtual only AGMs. I rejoiced when BP lost their resolution on this topic this year.