MSE News: Nationalised bank customers 'to get choice' after sell-off

scott_lithgows

chambta wrote: »

There's still a Bradford & Bingley on my High Street.

True,but B+B savings were sold to abbey/santander in sep 2008 after nationalisation,no option was given to opt out and have the cash shifted to a better organisation.

opinions4u

oxenryd wrote: »

Just watching ITV news, they've just said that the 3 new banks we'll get will be Virgin, Tesco and MetroBank. And if I heard correctly, some will be operating by Spring 2010

They might be proved right. One assumes the good bits of Northern Rock will be in place by next Spring. I suspect RBS and Lloyds will take a little bit longer to spin off their spare parts (with 2013 being the deadline).

Hidden in the small print of the Lloyds sell-off is that the TSB brand name is up for grabs (whereas Lloyds will retain the C&G brand, but not the branches). This means that if a private equity enterprise came along to set up shop, there would be a ready made name in place.

Lloyds have played a blinder with the EU on this one. They probably should have been made to divest the Halifax retail bank in its entirity. Instead they are getting rid of some minor bit parts of the LBG.

C&G Branches - they were going to close them all anyway
Intelligent Finance - they had already closed this to all but new savings business
LloydsTSB Scotland - overshadowed by RBS and BOS north of the border
A handful of LloydsTSB branches in England & Wales - probably the ones where there is duplicate branch representation in the town centre, dating back a decade to the merger between TSB and Lloyds.

oxenryd

scott_lithgows wrote: »

True,but B+B savings were sold to abbey/santander in sep 2008 after nationalisation,no option was given to opt out and have the cash shifted to a better organisation.

Surely, just close your account and move your money elsewhere.

chambta

oxenryd wrote: »

Surely, just close your account and move your money elsewhere.

Exactly. I completely agree that Lloyds TSB;s board must be chuckling away to themselves reflecting how well they've done out of this compared to RBS. Seems to me they've been ordered to do what they'd probably have chosen to do whereas RBS are being shorn of profitable parts of their business.

stclair

CG19a wrote: »

Would that still be the case though when all these changes are made? I know its probably still a bit to early to say for sure. It would be great if they joined up to the post office scheme like Lloyds and Coop.

Its early days yet as you say, but I dont see no reason why they would change the process. Otherwise they would possibly lose customers due to change for your given reason.

jambosans

opinions4u wrote: »

Lloyds have played a blinder with the EU on this one. They probably should have been made to divest the Halifax retail bank in its entirity. Instead they are getting rid of some minor bit parts of the LBG.

I would have thought pulling apart Halifax and Bank of Scotland to be much more of headache than disposing of the ailing TSB branch network in Scotland.

Interestingly enough (this is pure speculation), many of the reports I have read have dropped Halifax when referring to the Group's regional names. Bank of Scotland is being kept in Scotland, and specifically Lloyds (dropping the TSB) in England and Wales - where's the Halifax? It is just a brand name, so would be easier to drop than Bank of Scotland for example, and obviously Lloyds Banking Group aren't going to drop the name Lloyds.

I agree with the rest of your post, Lloyds Banking Group have walked away relatively unscathed by these divestments. I personally thought Scottish Widows would have went up for sale, but I suppose that's one of Lloyds TSB's crown jewels from before the takeover.

opinions4u

jambosans wrote: »

I would have thought pulling apart Halifax and Bank of Scotland to be much more of headache than disposing of the ailing TSB branch network in Scotland.

Not today it wouldn't. They have barely merged any of the retail operations yet. Branches, call centres and web sites are still very much different between Lloyds and Halifax.

Indeed, if it was really about creating high street competition the EU could have insisted that Halifax retail was spun-off within months. The new business creation is up to 4 years off.

Somebody owed Eric Daniels a huge favour and he's called it in big time with this.

Interestingly enough (this is pure speculation), many of the reports I have read have dropped Halifax when referring to the Group's regional names. Bank of Scotland is being kept in Scotland, and specifically Lloyds (dropping the TSB) in England and Wales - where's the Halifax? It is just a brand name, so would be easier to drop than Bank of Scotland for example, and obviously Lloyds Banking Group aren't going to drop the name Lloyds.

The Halifax name will, I suspect, be kept. The brand attracts a different customer segment to Lloyds and the high street Halifax business (ignoring the Corporate side and sub-prime mortgage side) has been more profitable than Lloyds high street branches.

I agree with the rest of your post, Lloyds Banking Group have walked away relatively unscathed by these divestments. I personally thought Scottish Widows would have went up for sale, but I suppose that's one of Lloyds TSB's crown jewels from before the takeover.

While they bought a crock of brown stuff with the HBOS deal, this arrangement gives them the time to generate the promised cost savings from that merger while allowing them to sell off some of the less profitable parts of the combined retail business. They never even wanted IF or the C&G branches!

Somebody has played a blinder.

xaulleo

So where will this leave existing C&G customers with mortgages? We are locked into a rubbish one with them and I would love to leave (at the moment, the savings from leaving doesn't really outweigh the penalty) - but would we still get penalised if we did, even though we will supposedly have a choice??

opinions4u

xaulleo wrote: »

So where will this leave existing C&G customers with mortgages? We are locked into a rubbish one with them and I would love to leave (at the moment, the savings from leaving doesn't really outweigh the penalty) - but would we still get penalised if we did, even though we will supposedly have a choice??

There would be no change to the mortgage terms and conditions that you signed up for.

Why would there be?

xaulleo

opinions4u wrote: »

There would be no change to the mortgage terms and conditions that you signed up for.

Why would there be?

As we would be going to a new company (as I understand it, I could be wrong here), I presumed the T&Cs would change. I didn't sign up for a mortage with X company, I signed up with C&G and so I would expect to given new T&Cs. It's the whole thing about saying we're going to have a choice - if I am still locked in, I don't have a choice, even though I may not want to be with any new company.