French Fires and British style chips are the same thing. They are just called different things in different parts of the world.
Do you state this from experience? You have eaten both? Obviously, the raw vegetable used as an ingredient is some species of potato. Amurican “French Fries” are an extruded product. Potatoes are skinned, mashed, and cooked in industrial sized batches of smooth glop. The “masa” (the technical term for the mix) is processed through an extrusion machine which produces the precise, unvarying, cross sections of the French Fry. The lengths are randomized by the cutting wires that trim the extruded product to length. The remaining steps are to batter the pieces and then flash freeze. ~~~~~~~~~~~ I like to hope that British Chips are potatoes, cut into wedge shapes (chips; like wood chips), battered, then immediately fried. Never frozen. Never processed into a gooey mush. (But IDK maybe Amuricanization has ruined the chip.)
Speaking as someone who is half-American and half-English and lived in both places, I can tell you that this realy comes down to quality of ingredient and cooking. The "French Fries" is a method of doing chips. If you get cheap, nasty McDonald's version you get nasty cooking and ingredients. The "English Chip" for lack of a better term (I just call them chips) is another way, but can equally be done horrendously wrong. I like both versions. Just has to be made from actual potatoes (not weird starch mix) and properly cooked. Both are served in the UK (not talking about McDonald's, but actual pub or restaurant food).