Banks don't want my custom it seems

dunstonh

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.

That isnt possible and hasnt been since 1994. Pre-regulation it was a case of read a book over a weekend and off you go. Since then, three exams were required (later increased to 5 and has been increased to a higher standard).

If he wasnt a financial adviser but just an insurance agent, then its possible as a weeks course and the protection exam was easily possible (protection level is light touch and the exam for that is easy).

Tribulation

dunstonh wrote: »

That isnt possible and hasnt been since 1994. Pre-regulation it was a case of read a book over a weekend and off you go. Since then, three exams were required (later increased to 5 and has been increased to a higher standard).

If he wasnt a financial adviser but just an insurance agent, then its possible as a weeks course and the protection exam was easily possible (protection level is light touch and the exam for that is easy).

Yep, he worked for an insurance firm but said he was a financial adviser.

Talking through his backside as usual lol

dqnet

Lokolo wrote: »

Do you really think that paying £100 a month is going make the bank roll out a red carpet for you? They have thousands of customers in one area, I very much doubt they really care much for your £100 and the staff costs don't make it worthwhile. Hence the appointment scheme, saves staff sitting around waiting for people like you to pop in every now and again to open an account. Hire less staff, make appointments, accounts/staff member increases.

Not quite sure how a branch account is better than an online one though!

I couldnt help it but saying... hahahhahahahah!

Naf

opinions4u wrote: »

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.

A bank's first duty to it's customers is to protect its own bottom line; after all, if the bank goes under, the customers all lose out. This means that they can't keep paying out to customers for claims over loss of interest, incorrect advice or being disadvantaged by the type of account they took. The number of complaints that come because people don't open their post (and didn't listen in the first place when they were told the rate would last on for the first year), so they don't read the notice about a drop in interest and recommending they come to branch to discuss alternative options, so they end up on a low rate; then decide this is the bank's fault. Most people (and to be fair, its probably not the majority of people on here because on here people are generally clued up [that's why you're here after all]) don't really understand how to make the most of their money, or how the accounts work. They need someone to filter their options and explain how the accounts will actually help them.

opinions4u wrote: »

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.

If the banks did just add a clause to the effect 'I had no advice and chose my own account' we'd also be adding complaints along the lines that we had allowed our customers to be disadvantaged by not informing them of another account that would have been better for their circumstances even though we had not been given the chance to tell them, or even to find out if any of the other accounts would suit them. For example; Santander offer two accounts that are instant access, one can be opened in branch, and has a minimum opening deposit of £5000, can have a card and internet access to manage the account as well as branch counter service. The other can only be opened by phone or on the internet, and the only access is over the branch counter. Although they both pay at 2.5%, the first one will lose you some interest when you withdraw, the second won't. If a customer saw the two accounts, and didn't want to have to open the account online or by phone but didn't read the part about loss of interest and just dropped in an application. Opening the account would mean we would have a complaint on our hands 12 months down the line when almost no interest was paid because they had made regular withdrawals throughout the year. Although, based on your comments here, you would agree that we had done nothing wrong as a bank; also based on your comments the customer would still feel we had not provided them good service (even though we had followed their instructions perfectly), and I would fully expect the FOS to uphold their complaint. The only way to protect ourselves is to limit this kind of opening to online where it has been entirely up to you to ensure the account type and no adviser has been involved whatsoever.

Tribulation wrote: »

I disagree

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

I agree; so all of the advisers were busy opening account for other new customers: where's the poor service?

Tribulation wrote: »

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.

Definitely not with BT. I would suggest its more to do with there being fewer customers calling to open accounts than there are phoning to complain.
Good service is to see people in the order they arrived; irrespective of their financial value, status etc. First come first served every time. Customers who have a booked appointment came in first so get seen before those who just walk in.

Tribulation wrote: »

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.

4) unfortunately our branch is completely full already with other customers opening accounts; we'd like to see you come back and would be pleased to open the account for you; here's when we can definitely see you.

Tribulation wrote: »

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.

No it's not, its just luck of the draw if you've gone in when the shop is already full to bursting. They'd not turn you away in a retail store like that though; just ask you to queue. In a bank you'd be welcome to 'queue' (i.e. just wait in their seating area), but because an appointment system was in place they could already tell you that you couldn't be seen. I think this is much better service than 'just stand in that mile-long queue over there and you'll be seen eventually, might take an hour though'. At least with an appointment system they are able to tell you immediately when the next space will be, and you can choose to take that slot, or leave without having to wait around before deciding it was going to take too long.
And anyway banks aren't 'off the shelf' retail stores, so making a comparison between somewhere like Argos or a supermarket just doesn't really apply.

Tribulation wrote: »

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?

What then; all the offices in my branch are full already (and we have quite a few), so even with more staff there would not be enough space to see customers. If that argument were valid it could just be used however many staff were employed, because there are always times when all the advisers are already with people especially on a Saturday. Ultimately, to continue to exist the banks, like all businesses, have to balance their staff across the whole week to offer as much service they can every day. More staff are generally in on a Saturday; yesterday not a single person had a day off in my branch as we knew it would be extremely busy; but we are obliged (by the union) to give staff at least one Saturday off in four.

I'll keep saying it 'till you listen; did you complain last time you went to your doctors' surgery and were told to make an appointment, or the last time you turned up at the hospital and were told they couldn't just book you in for whatever procedure you took a fancy to this time, or the last time your dentist told you they didn't have a space for the next couple of months or insisted you wouldn't need another general check up for around six months. Or maybe (/probably) none of you have ever done any of those things in the first place to be able to make a complaint, because you already know that this is the way the system works.

noh wrote: »

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

The bank going under would be for the good of their customers? It's not good for the customer or the bank if they get more complaints, have to pay more out in redress and compensation and/or in fines. You all complain about the number of complaints banks get, now you're complaining that there aren't enough reasons to complain. If you can't work it out, how on earth can the banks ever manage?

smartiedriver_2

Cash-Cow wrote: »

They also want you in a room so that they can sell you lots of other products that they make more money on. In fact any excuse to get you in lock down. Recently I tried to pay in a cheque for £7000 and I had to be 'interviewed'. This was dressed up as a security check but really they wanted to sell me an ISA.

Cash cow - you seem very down on bankers. Have you thought that perhaps they were trying to make sure you were putting the funds in the best possible place? The majority of clients I see have no idea of the range of products available to them, and frequently deposit monies into ISAs only to take them out a month later and thus lose their tax-free allowances.

Don't always be so convinced that the bankers aren't actually trying to help you!

smartiedriver_2

As a general point, online accounts are the best. I work for HSBC but Santander has the best savings rates at the minute. I opened a Santander ISA online without having to visit a branch so you don't always have to go in.

As for the banks, they are businesses too at the end of the day, with shareholders and regulators to satisfy. If wages were wasted on staff sitting around doing nothing, people would also complain, so it's a lose-lose situation.

In terms of appointments, you would never expect to see any other professional without an appointment - an accountant, solicitor, dentist, doctor etc, so why expect that in a bank?

And finally, Erics Mum, you are dead right, cheques cannot simply be returned for no valid reason, albeit mistakes do happen for example if a client has paid in after the account has been reviewed first thing in a morning but not told the bank.

So people, I appreciate banking is having a tough time at the moment, but just think about it logically before you start kicking off about the 'terrible' banks.

Rollinghome

smartiedriver wrote: »

In terms of appointments, you would never expect to see any other professional without an appointment - an accountant, solicitor, dentist, doctor etc, so why expect that in a bank?

Sorry, I get a tad irritated with bank clerks, financial advisers etc. with minimal qualifications bizarrely comparing themselves with highly qualified professionals such as doctors. Even a humble GP is likely to have done a 4-7 year degree, 2 foundation years, followed by 3 years vocational training.

Retail bank staff and financial advisers could more accurately be compared with travel agent staff and others in the retail sector who most certainly can be seen without appointment. When the minimum qualification for IFAs is raised in 2013 it will still be well below degree level.

If other bank staff are encouraged to see themselves on a par with doctors, as you vaingloriously appear to do, that's possibly the source of the irritation to some customers such as the OP. Banks provide a retail service and need to learn from more successful retailers how to do it better.

Personally I'd avoid using banks at busy times and on the one occasion when a uppity bank manager told me I'd need an appointment to see her to sort out a mess they'd made, I made it crystal clear to her that wasn't acceptable and would see her now. She got the point.

It's simple enough, be reasonable and courteous with people whether they are bin-men, shop assistants, bank clerks or civil servants and insist on the same respect from them.

opinions4u

Banks provide a retail service and need to learn from more successful retailers how to do it better.

I don't disagree with this. Although most high street retailers are poor examples to learn from.

Which retailers would you currently call "successful"? Tesco, Asda, M&S? I think most of the high street banks have retail arms that are more profitable (and remained profitable through the credit crunch).

I remember the word "retail" suddenly appearing in every internal Halifax communication in the late 1990s. Although I knew the organisation was a retail bank at the time, the phrase was not one that had been used culturally within the organisation before.

Then I understood why it was now something of a buzz word. The recruitment process for branches changed. Instead of looking to recruit the typical "A" level candidates who chose not to go to university, they started to recruit shop staff. The starting salary was frozen for an extended period.

It was all about cost. Not quality.

oldagetraveller

OP I can understand why there was no-one available to open an account for you. Most of the staff were probably wasting their employers time posting l o n g replies to sites like this. I'm astonished by the number of posters who admit to working for a bank and find the time to post on MSE during working hours. Do their employers know what they're doing? Their place of "employment" is obviously overstaffed!

smartiedriver_2

oldagetraveller wrote: »

OP I can understand why there was no-one available to open an account for you. Most of the staff were probably wasting their employers time posting l o n g replies to sites like this. I'm astonished by the number of posters who admit to working for a bank and find the time to post on MSE during working hours. Do their employers know what they're doing? Their place of "employment" is obviously overstaffed!

Oldagetraveller.... have you never heard of holidays!!!!!!