Bank branch closures
Discussion
V8mate said:
Eric Mc said:
And please don't trot out the "nothing to fear, nothing to hide" line. That is the utterance of a naive fool.
No-one has.Eric Mc said:
V8mate said:
Eric Mc said:
And please don't trot out the "nothing to fear, nothing to hide" line. That is the utterance of a naive fool.
No-one has.It was a "just in case" comment. There were a few comments above which were borderline referring to such a scenario.
Stuff changes... and the majority no longer want to pay for you to have a bit slice of prime High St real estate you can pop into on an occasional whim. If you don't like it... open your own bank, there's a completely free market in retail banking.
I'm currently treasurer of a small amateur club, when I took over the role I tried to update the bank mandate online, but couldn't. Tried phoning them but that was also a dead end as they couldn't complete the process until I had taken some identification into a branch to prove who I was anyway. Sometimes it is easier to speak to someone face to face. And in this case I had no choice.
Internet banking is of limited use to us, club rules require 2 signatures on all cheques. We need to regularly withdraw a small float, pay in cash or cheques. Without a local branch it would be a lot harder to administer. And there's plenty of people in the same position.
For all the smug, I'm alright, f
k the rest of society brigade, can you really not see that there is a justifiable reason for keeping at least some branches open.
Internet banking is of limited use to us, club rules require 2 signatures on all cheques. We need to regularly withdraw a small float, pay in cash or cheques. Without a local branch it would be a lot harder to administer. And there's plenty of people in the same position.
For all the smug, I'm alright, f
k the rest of society brigade, can you really not see that there is a justifiable reason for keeping at least some branches open.V8mate said:
I think you're losing the plot, Eric.
Stuff changes... and the majority no longer want to pay for you to have a bit slice of prime High St real estate you can pop into on an occasional whim. If you don't like it... open your own bank, there's a completely free market in retail banking.
"Stuff changes" is another foolish argument. Some change is good and some change is bad. If you had said "stuff improves" I might have agreed. But changes are made primarily for the benefit of the organisation - not the customers. Ignoring what a large chunk of your customers want or need is dumb.Stuff changes... and the majority no longer want to pay for you to have a bit slice of prime High St real estate you can pop into on an occasional whim. If you don't like it... open your own bank, there's a completely free market in retail banking.
Zetec-S said:
I'm currently treasurer of a small amateur club, when I took over the role I tried to update the bank mandate online, but couldn't. Tried phoning them but that was also a dead end as they couldn't complete the process until I had taken some identification into a branch to prove who I was anyway. Sometimes it is easier to speak to someone face to face. And in this case I had no choice.
Internet banking is of limited use to us, club rules require 2 signatures on all cheques. We need to regularly withdraw a small float, pay in cash or cheques. Without a local branch it would be a lot harder to administer. And there's plenty of people in the same position.
For all the smug, I'm alright, fk the rest of society brigade, can you really not see that there is a justifiable reason for keeping at least some branches open.
I'll include myself in your carefully described group, but I've got some bad news for you: *you* will need to re-think how you administer your club, because the world of finance won't be taking backward steps anytime soon.Internet banking is of limited use to us, club rules require 2 signatures on all cheques. We need to regularly withdraw a small float, pay in cash or cheques. Without a local branch it would be a lot harder to administer. And there's plenty of people in the same position.
For all the smug, I'm alright, f
k the rest of society brigade, can you really not see that there is a justifiable reason for keeping at least some branches open.V8mate said:
I'll include myself in your carefully described group, but I've got some bad news for you: *you* will need to re-think how you administer your club, because the world of finance won't be taking backward steps anytime soon.
Yep, the club will need to change. But I'd argue the banking industry has already taken a backward step by making me phone them and also go into the branch.V8mate said:
Zetec-S said:
I'm currently treasurer of a small amateur club, when I took over the role I tried to update the bank mandate online, but couldn't. Tried phoning them but that was also a dead end as they couldn't complete the process until I had taken some identification into a branch to prove who I was anyway. Sometimes it is easier to speak to someone face to face. And in this case I had no choice.
Internet banking is of limited use to us, club rules require 2 signatures on all cheques. We need to regularly withdraw a small float, pay in cash or cheques. Without a local branch it would be a lot harder to administer. And there's plenty of people in the same position.
For all the smug, I'm alright, fk the rest of society brigade, can you really not see that there is a justifiable reason for keeping at least some branches open.
I'll include myself in your carefully described group, but I've got some bad news for you: *you* will need to re-think how you administer your club, because the world of finance won't be taking backward steps anytime soon.Internet banking is of limited use to us, club rules require 2 signatures on all cheques. We need to regularly withdraw a small float, pay in cash or cheques. Without a local branch it would be a lot harder to administer. And there's plenty of people in the same position.
For all the smug, I'm alright, f
k the rest of society brigade, can you really not see that there is a justifiable reason for keeping at least some branches open.Their attitude to charities stinks.
Indeed, they haven't even told us what type of tune they want us to play. Their message seems to be, as far as the voluntary sector is concerned, give up - we ain't going to help.
Why should we have to jump to THEIR tune all the time?
Eric Mc said:
Nope - the BANKS need to sort out how they handle clubs and societies. The message I'm getting is that they don't want to. What good is that to that sector.
Their attitude to charities stinks.
Indeed, they haven't even told us what type of tune they want us to play. Their message seems to be, as far as the voluntary sector is concerned, give up - we ain't going to help.
Why should we have to jump to THEIR tune all the time?
Because the banks are commercial organisations. If your business was profitable to them they would be trying to oblige.Their attitude to charities stinks.
Indeed, they haven't even told us what type of tune they want us to play. Their message seems to be, as far as the voluntary sector is concerned, give up - we ain't going to help.
Why should we have to jump to THEIR tune all the time?
Why should they put themselves out to suit you?
Eric Mc said:
V8mate said:
Zetec-S said:
I'm currently treasurer of a small amateur club, when I took over the role I tried to update the bank mandate online, but couldn't. Tried phoning them but that was also a dead end as they couldn't complete the process until I had taken some identification into a branch to prove who I was anyway. Sometimes it is easier to speak to someone face to face. And in this case I had no choice.
Internet banking is of limited use to us, club rules require 2 signatures on all cheques. We need to regularly withdraw a small float, pay in cash or cheques. Without a local branch it would be a lot harder to administer. And there's plenty of people in the same position.
For all the smug, I'm alright, fk the rest of society brigade, can you really not see that there is a justifiable reason for keeping at least some branches open.
I'll include myself in your carefully described group, but I've got some bad news for you: *you* will need to re-think how you administer your club, because the world of finance won't be taking backward steps anytime soon.Internet banking is of limited use to us, club rules require 2 signatures on all cheques. We need to regularly withdraw a small float, pay in cash or cheques. Without a local branch it would be a lot harder to administer. And there's plenty of people in the same position.
For all the smug, I'm alright, f
k the rest of society brigade, can you really not see that there is a justifiable reason for keeping at least some branches open.Their attitude to charities stinks.
Indeed, they haven't even told us what type of tune they want us to play. Their message seems to be, as far as the voluntary sector is concerned, give up - we ain't going to help.
Why should we have to jump to THEIR tune all the time?
You really don't seem to understand that most UK banks are expected to make profits for their investors and, in general, retail banking is not likely to contribute much (if anything - more likely a loss). Their profits will more probably come from any form of loan (mortgage/credit card etc) or insurance premiums. The local club or charity, or Mrs Higgins, or the local vicar, expects to be able to pay in/out cheques/cash and use an ATM and the internet, receive statements etc - all usually free of charge, or at minimal cost to them.
A mutual (building society) may be more accommodating, but they won't be dramatically different, and so you are left with what has always been the most convenient outlet - the Post Office. If the PO can't do whatever it is that you require then it may be that you need to change your own arrangements.
bad company said:
Because the banks are commercial organisations. If your business was profitable to them they would be trying to oblige.
Why should they put themselves out to suit you?
I don't have an issue with banks wanting to minimise costs and make a profit, and don't expect things to stay the same with dozens of different branches on the high street, but there should be some sort of middle ground. I've sometimes wondered if there was a way in which a few different banks could share the same premises on the high street and reduce costs - no idea if practical or not?Why should they put themselves out to suit you?
My dad worked for one of the big banks for over 30 years, couldn't wait to take VR when he turned 50. Couldn't stand the toxic atmosphere where you had "customer service advisors" who were pressured into selling as much as possible, often to people who really couldn't afford it. They're not customer service advisors, they're salespeople. He wasn't at all surprised by the whole PPI scandal and just glad he'd got out by then.
The banks seem to have the idea that you can't offer proper customer service and still make a decent profit.
Zetec-S said:
I don't have an issue with banks wanting to minimise costs and make a profit, and don't expect things to stay the same with dozens of different branches on the high street, but there should be some sort of middle ground. I've sometimes wondered if there was a way in which a few different banks could share the same premises on the high street and reduce costs - no idea if practical or not?
My dad worked for one of the big banks for over 30 years, couldn't wait to take VR when he turned 50. Couldn't stand the toxic atmosphere where you had "customer service advisors" who were pressured into selling as much as possible, often to people who really couldn't afford it. They're not customer service advisors, they're salespeople. He wasn't at all surprised by the whole PPI scandal and just glad he'd got out by then.
The banks seem to have the idea that you can't offer proper customer service and still make a decent profit.
.My dad worked for one of the big banks for over 30 years, couldn't wait to take VR when he turned 50. Couldn't stand the toxic atmosphere where you had "customer service advisors" who were pressured into selling as much as possible, often to people who really couldn't afford it. They're not customer service advisors, they're salespeople. He wasn't at all surprised by the whole PPI scandal and just glad he'd got out by then.
The banks seem to have the idea that you can't offer proper customer service and still make a decent profit.
You'll usually find the 'proper customer service' in the loans/mortgage/insurance products, along with appropriate staffing........
.
Cost of banking is very likely to increase in the near to medium term. Seperation of retail from Investment banking activities will obviously de-risk; but also remove vital profit support. The effect to consumers will be in both increased charges for deposit banking (cost of retail banking deposit activity was in the region of .14% - and the Govt then taxes the banks with Levy); and furthermore loss of access to wholesale packaging services so the bank spread for borrowing will increase (balance sheet compression will be more difficult so leverage ratio premium will be passed to the customer).
For years retail and cash deposit making services have been subsidised, those subsidies have been eroded as a post crisis response. You really can’t have it 2 ways. Smaller less (systematically) risky banks = increased cost of financial service provision to the man on the street. If the banks thought they could generate enough fees for providing branch access they'd stay open - unfortunately its a small minority that want to retain this service. Castigating the banks for making profit, is a really odd behaviour or what I call “greyflake” (like snowflake but for older people whom should know better) – anyone can check the holdings of bank SHS and in the main its Pension funds / retail fund managers etc.
For years retail and cash deposit making services have been subsidised, those subsidies have been eroded as a post crisis response. You really can’t have it 2 ways. Smaller less (systematically) risky banks = increased cost of financial service provision to the man on the street. If the banks thought they could generate enough fees for providing branch access they'd stay open - unfortunately its a small minority that want to retain this service. Castigating the banks for making profit, is a really odd behaviour or what I call “greyflake” (like snowflake but for older people whom should know better) – anyone can check the holdings of bank SHS and in the main its Pension funds / retail fund managers etc.
Nothing wrong with making a profit, but you could argue as to what lengths they should be allowed to go to in order to make that profit? I guess it depends whether you think access to personal (face-to-face) banking is a basic fundamental right/need?
How would people feel if Royal Mail stopped delivering to certain areas of the country because it was too expensive? Or BT said they weren't prepared to install a broadband connection because it wouldn't be profitable?
How would people feel if Royal Mail stopped delivering to certain areas of the country because it was too expensive? Or BT said they weren't prepared to install a broadband connection because it wouldn't be profitable?
condor said:
When a bank decides to close the local branch you bank at and use regularly - what do you do?
I ask as I bank at RBS and they're shutting 162 branches across England and Wales. My branch doesn't close till November so have plenty of time to consider alternative Banks .
Join the 21st Century and use Internet Banking and the mobile app.I ask as I bank at RBS and they're shutting 162 branches across England and Wales. My branch doesn't close till November so have plenty of time to consider alternative Banks .
Only kidding. well, sort of. ;-)
Zetec-S said:
Nothing wrong with making a profit, but you could argue as to what lengths they should be allowed to go to in order to make that profit? I guess it depends whether you think access to personal (face-to-face) banking is a basic fundamental right/need?
Whether or not it's a fundamental need, I think you've missed out the rather important word 'free' in that sentence. The issue is that because in the UK we are used to free banking, the banks are rather naturally focussed on costs rather than service. If everybody paid for basic everyday banking, as is usual in most countries, I think you'd find that physical branches suddenly become a lot more viable.Zetec-S said:
How would people feel if Royal Mail stopped delivering to certain areas of the country because it was too expensive? Or BT said they weren't prepared to install a broadband connection because it wouldn't be profitable?
Not sure about Royal Mail, but BT certainly are allowed to pass on their costs of connection over a certain level (I think it's about £4k). I have friends who were quoted £11k for connection, but they regard not having a phone line as being a consequence of their choice to live quite literally in the middle of nowhere.Robertj21a said:
I'm sorry to say that I agree with some others on here that you seem to be in danger of 'losing the plot' !
You really don't seem to understand that most UK banks are expected to make profits for their investors and, in general, retail banking is not likely to contribute much (if anything - more likely a loss). Their profits will more probably come from any form of loan (mortgage/credit card etc) or insurance premiums. The local club or charity, or Mrs Higgins, or the local vicar, expects to be able to pay in/out cheques/cash and use an ATM and the internet, receive statements etc - all usually free of charge, or at minimal cost to them.
A mutual (building society) may be more accommodating, but they won't be dramatically different, and so you are left with what has always been the most convenient outlet - the Post Office. If the PO can't do whatever it is that you require then it may be that you need to change your own arrangements.
The problem is the modern ethos that PLCs only have one responsibility - and that is to their shareholders. Customers and society at large can go hang.You really don't seem to understand that most UK banks are expected to make profits for their investors and, in general, retail banking is not likely to contribute much (if anything - more likely a loss). Their profits will more probably come from any form of loan (mortgage/credit card etc) or insurance premiums. The local club or charity, or Mrs Higgins, or the local vicar, expects to be able to pay in/out cheques/cash and use an ATM and the internet, receive statements etc - all usually free of charge, or at minimal cost to them.
A mutual (building society) may be more accommodating, but they won't be dramatically different, and so you are left with what has always been the most convenient outlet - the Post Office. If the PO can't do whatever it is that you require then it may be that you need to change your own arrangements.
As I said - it stinks.
Mezger said:
condor said:
When a bank decides to close the local branch you bank at and use regularly - what do you do?
I ask as I bank at RBS and they're shutting 162 branches across England and Wales. My branch doesn't close till November so have plenty of time to consider alternative Banks .
Join the 21st Century and use Internet Banking and the mobile app.I ask as I bank at RBS and they're shutting 162 branches across England and Wales. My branch doesn't close till November so have plenty of time to consider alternative Banks .
Only kidding. well, sort of. ;-)
A lot of TSB customers have had money removed from their account by fraudsters taking advantage of their IT problems. This is after they've not had access to their accounts for a couple of weeks. It's not that uncommon that an IT failure stops debit/credit card transactions from going through.
I would think it sensible to have a non on-line banking presence to ensure you have access to money at all times.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff