Banks don't want my custom it seems

Naf

No, it's not that they opt not to in favour of sitting every customer down to sell to. As I said before, if the adviser hasn't seen the customer to ensure they're fully informed, and the customer isn't signing the form in front of them there are 2 issues: firstly it's an ID thing that branches work in a face to face ID environment, not telephone or postal so we need to have the customer with us for the opening. Secondly there's the fact that should your own decision disadvantage you, and the form you've signed doesn't make it clear the sale has been entirely non-advised then you potentially have a case to come back and complain in the future.

dunstonh

It appears that many banks, including the one you work for, have decided not to offer the non-advised option.

The probably save it for the internet.

Branches cost far more money and need to sell to be profitable. Unprofitable branches close.

noh

Naf wrote: »

No, it's not that they opt not to in favour of sitting every customer down to sell to. As I said before, if the adviser hasn't seen the customer to ensure they're fully informed, and the customer isn't signing the form in front of them there are 2 issues: firstly it's an ID thing that branches work in a face to face ID environment, not telephone or postal so we need to have the customer with us for the opening. Secondly there's the fact that should your own decision disadvantage you, and the form you've signed doesn't make it clear the sale has been entirely non-advised then you potentially have a case to come back and complain in the future.

Your employer has decided to do it that way.
They are not obliged to make sure the customer is fully informed.
They can offer savings accounts on a non advised basis, as you rightly say, but they have chosen not to.

The ID issue is also as a result of the systems that have been put in place.
If my ID can be electronically verified in a couple of minutes while I sit at home exactly the same can be done in branch.
They do it that way because of a policy decision not because they are obliged to.

It is done that way to protect the bank not for the good of the customer.

noh

dunstonh wrote: »

The probably save it for the internet.

Branches cost far more money and need to sell to be profitable. Unprofitable branches close.

I agree that is the case.

Tribulation

Naf wrote: »

Sorry to say it, OP, but I actually think your original point is pretty much nonsense; nobody being free to open your account for you, especially on a Saturday, isn't poor service at all. You have every right to feel disappointed that you couldn't get what you wanted done when you wanted, but not to feel this is in some way the fault of any of the banks you visited..

I disagree

Nearly any other organisation I can think of puts two customers above others, new ones and those wanting to leave.

Phone up a service provider such as Sky, Virgin, BT etc, if you select sales, you get answered almost immediately because while they obviously want to keep their existing customers happy (although I do wonder about that), they also want as much new custom as they could possibly get.

Turning away a potential new customer to open a bog standard savings account is effectively giving one of 3 impressions to that customer.

1) We make too much money else where, your just an inconvenience we have to suffer to make the powers that be happy, we don't really want to help you at all.

2) Cant be bothered if it's just a couple of hundred pounds, we only want customers with loads of money.

3) Cant be bothered full stop. Why should I go the extra mile to please you.

Yes the banks are to blame, it might now be standard practice, but that doesn't make it right. If I go into say Argos to buy a TV and they tell me they haven't got the staff to serve me, it's Argos's fault, no one else's.

How you can say that isn't poor service is beyond me. If people who work at banks generally think this is good service then no wonder there's so much hatred towards them now.

I'm usually very sympathetic (much more than most) when it comes to bankers bonuses, I believe if you get emploiyed on a contract that says if you achieve xyz then you get rewarded abc, then so be it, no one else's business but yours. But when people cant even walk into a bank and open a bog standard account, and people defending the banks say we cant blame the banks and it's not poor service, I have to strongly disagree.

Maybe if realistic salaries and bonuses were paid to those at the top playing with our money then they could employ another couple of staff members at the branches?

Tribulation

noh wrote: »

A poor analogy.
A doctor has 5 years or more university education and is someone I would trust to give me advice and is more analogous to an Independant Financial Adviser in that they give whole of market advice.
An adviser at a high street bank is more like a salesman for a drug company, very little training and his primary objective is to make money for his company and himself.

Very very true. My old boss got sacked from his IT job, went on a very very short few week course, then took us all out to lunch as he was now a financial adviser working for a very well known organisation and spent his entire time trying to sell us critical life insurance along with a load of other stuff.

He knew nothing about what he was selling, simply acted like a call centre member of staff, using a laptop computer to tell us what we wanted to know and didn't actually know a single thing about what he was talking about.

ERICS_MUM

dunstonh wrote: »

I have had examples of banks bounce cheques made payable to investment companies using false reasons just to get the person to come in and then find that its a sales interview.

Can you remember the reason for them bouncing the cheque ? It would probably be written on the top of the cheque face. Only a handful of reasons are permitted

ERICS_MUM

noh wrote: »

....................It is done that way to protect the bank not for the good of the customer.

Any company's first responsibility is to protect itself. This safeguards the shareholder, customers and staff.

We've recently seen the dire consequences of banks who have not protected themselves.

Tribulation

How hard is it to have a part of the form the customer signs that simply states

The customer has chosen to open this account without first speaking to one of our financial advisors

Or something along those lines?

If post office counter staff can be trained to check id, insurance etc, surely bank staff can be trained to check id too? I've stood behind some of the customers on a saturday morning in a bank, overhearing some of the long winded things they are asking about. On average, reading through a form to check it's filled out correctly, checking id, typing in persons name, house number and postcode onto a computer screen to open an account, would be a lot quicker?

Or is it because there's so many other questions on the screen, all designed to sell us something we don't want, that causes it to take too long?

opinions4u

Tribulation wrote: »

How hard is it to have a part of the form the customer signs that simply states

The customer has chosen to open this account without first speaking to one of our financial advisors

Very easy.

But people complain about mortgage advice where they haven't received advice. And the FOS has been known to uphold complaints in those circumstances.

The suggestion you make here opens up the door for a new wave of complaints about banks opening savings accounts. "I decided to take the wrong savings account because their leaflets / application forms were misleading", being just one example. And the FOS have ruled that literature with a Plain English Society award is misleading, even where the provider has gone out of its way to make sure it isn't.

There is little doubt in my mind that 80%-90% of the population would be unable to select the best mix of accounts for their circumstances if the had to simply read a leaflet, fill out a form and tick a couple of boxes.

The number of posts on these pages that say something along the lines of "I earn £45k, have £12k to save and wish to add £500 a month, what's the best account for me?" followed by a reply linking them to Moneyfacts or the MSE Savings pages, followed by "I don't really understand" is staggering.

If you leave people to sort it out for themselves you are damning them to:

1) Buy the wrong account to start with.
2) Leave the money in the wrong account forever.