MSE News: Call for banks to help financially excluded

jambosans

snugglepet20 wrote: »

These basic accounts only give out cashcards and as there are not many proper cash machines except in town centres and at supermarkets people have to pay £1.50 + each time they need cash at those little machines in shops which is disgusting.

Not true. Some basic bank accounts offer cash cards, many however provide a Visa Electron or 'online' Visa Debit. For example, the Lloyds TSB Cash Account comes with a Visa Debit Card (online). See below for more details on basic bank accounts:-
http://www.moneymadeclear.fsa.gov.uk/pdfs/bank_accounts.pdf

snugglepet20

jambosans wrote: »

Not true. Some basic bank accounts offer cash cards, many however provide a Visa Electron or 'online' Visa Debit. For example, the Lloyds TSB Cash Account comes with a Visa Debit Card (online). See below for more details on basic bank accounts:-
http://www.moneymadeclear.fsa.gov.uk/pdfs/bank_accounts.pdf

Ok I am not a banking expert so I checked that out but they all still look pretty rubbish to me. Lloyds TSB may give you that card but they are also going to charge you for using other banks ATMs and almost all of them seem to have various catches that you wouldn't get with a normal current account such as limits on counter service and if they offer cards such as Solo and Electron they are pretty useless as a lot of places don't accept them in my experience. Also why would anyone ever open that First Trust account:eek:

jambosans

snugglepet20 wrote: »

Ok I am not a banking expert so I checked that out but they all still look pretty rubbish to me. Lloyds TSB may give you that card but they are also going to charge you for using other banks ATMs and almost all of them seem to have various catches that you wouldn't get with a normal current account

What do you expect from a basic bank account? I think, what you get (for nothing) is pretty good. Keep in mind (and I am generalising completely, so I may stand corrected) those with a basic bank account would normally be of a low net worth to the bank, so service restrictions to minimise cost are understandable. It's not discrimination, it's business.

Basic bank accounts are never going to be full current accounts due to (mainly) a lack of credit facilities. However, aside from credit, I think they come pretty close, for example, the Barclays Cash Card Account, which doesn't have counter or ATM restrictions (according to their website).

snugglepet20

jambosans wrote: »

What do you expect from a basic bank account? I think, what you get (for nothing) is pretty good. Keep in mind (and I am generalising completely, so I may stand corrected) those with a basic bank account would normally be of a low net worth to the bank, so service restrictions to minimise cost is understandable. It's not discrimination, it's business.

Would you feel that way if access to YOUR money was being restricted?

jambosans

snugglepet20 wrote: »

Would you feel that way if access to YOUR money was being restricted?

Yes, because I understand how the system works. I've also pointed out a couple of example basic bank accounts where the "restrictions" are minimal. If I had to switch to a basic bank account today I would barely notice a difference, I could still: bank online; withdraw cash; pay my bills via BACS, FPS, standing order or Direct Debit; transfer money between my accounts (or to someone else) via online or telephone banking; and pay via debit card in most stores.

TurkishDelight

Lokolo wrote: »

A bank account for spending, setting DDs yes. An account with an overdraft, ability to borrow money, no.

Agreed, everyone should have the right to have a bank account. However, some services should be a priviledge, not a right.

---

Affordable credit as a right!? No. It should be a privildge imo.

You took the words right off my keyboard :T

And this is the last website I would expect to see "credit" (so, debt/debt waiting to happen) touted as a right, or even a desirable thing.

~Brock~

snugglepet20 wrote: »

On the subject of doorstep lenders they should be banned as they prey on the desperate and stupid people

I pretty sure that the majority of people using these facilities that are neither desperate or stupid, but have simply made a lifestyle choice concerning a type of credit that happens to work for them, would wish you to retract such a branding.

chambta

jambosans wrote: »

Yes, because I understand how the system works. I've also pointed out a couple of example basic bank accounts where the "restrictions" are minimal. If I had to switch to a basic bank account today I would barely notice a difference, I could still: bank online; withdraw cash; pay my bills via BACS, FPS, standing order or Direct Debit; transfer money between my accounts (or to someone else) via online or telephone banking; and pay via debit card in most stores.

Agree with that.

My account stays in credit and cheques used barely twice a year.

tobyblume

davethorp wrote: »

So according to you someone could subject to status get an overdraft added to a basic bank account. I'll just call natwest and ask them if that's the case shall I?



that's what natwest has just said

Lokolo wrote: »

and then...



A bank account for spending, setting DDs yes. An account with an overdraft, ability to borrow money, no.

Agreed, everyone should have the right to have a bank account. However, some services should be a priviledge, not a right.

---

Affordable credit as a right!? No. It should be a privildge imo.

i've read all the posts to this thread and lots of people agree with Lokolo's views....but i see it a bit differently....

this isnt about having overdrafts and loans you cant afford. it's about more banks and consumers behaving more responsibly.
When someone doesnt have a bank account, how can they get a job? (how many people get paid cash in hand these days?). why should poor people not be able to get the discount from direct debit for electricty bills or other utilities?
The fact is it ends up costing us more (as taxpayers) dealing with the effects of poverty, than addressing the causes. Banks enjoy the benefit of public money to bail them out, but the cost of financial exclusion falls not to them but to society. If we're going to bail them out, surely they have a responsibilty to serve all communities.
But (and i appreciate this isnt necesarily clear from the article) this isnt just about individuals. It's also about access to capital for people that want to set up businesses. 25,000 viable businesses a year cant access capital and this number is only going to go up. The Better Banking campaign (which i support) is concerned with the need to change the system so we dont repeat the mistakes of the recent financial crisis. We're not moaning, negative, uneducated, bleeding-heart liberals that are apologists for people not managing their money properly. We think the system is failing all of us and needs to be changed.
Just because we may talk about irresponsible lending, doesnt mean that irresponsible borrrowing doesnt go on too. But how anyone can argue in favour of credit in excess of 10,000% APR - which is all that's available in some communities - is beyond me! :question:

glider3560

tobyblume wrote: »

When someone doesnt have a bank account, how can they get a job? (how many people get paid cash in hand these days?). why should poor people not be able to get the discount from direct debit for electricty bills or other utilities?

You seem to be making the assumption that "poor people" cannot get a bank account. This is simply not the case. I know many "poor people" who struggle to make ends meet who still manage to run their bank account well, in credit and not go into an unauthorised overdraft. Even if this is the case, there are plenty of basic bank accounts available that don't require credit checks but still accept direct debits.