MSE News: RBS punishes basic account holders in ATM crackdown

savagej

So what happened to government backing for financial inclusion and again why not take some of the profits made from the rich and re-distribute it to help those at the bottom of the ladder. They still make good profits regardless, why do these profits have to rise year or year so dramatically. They might not like it, but they are massive institutions, which goes hand in hand with great social responsibility given what they do and spending millions on sponsoring formula one or the olympics should come second to the good of all of their customers, not just the ones that make them a good buck or two.

They also make a small fortune as pointed out from other customers using their machines which could be redistributed and the fact the Post Office can be used is not much use due to the many many branch closure, which when you find you are in a town without one or it is closed and the only two banks in the town are HSBC and Barclays, you are then up a gum tree unless you can find somewhere to get cashback. Again, it leaves the most deprevied hunting around to get at their own money when those with good credit can get at theirs very easily, comparatively.

I beleive given that they are both government backed, these institutions should be forced to face up to their responsbilities regardless of the so called costs involved and use some of the profit to help their customers.

opinions4u

savagej wrote: »

So what happened to government backing for financial inclusion and again why not take some of the profits made from the rich and re-distribute it to help those at the bottom of the ladder.

The tax and benefit system already does this.

They still make good profits regardless

Remind me - add the last three years' profit and loss together and tell me the result.

why do these profits have to rise year or year so dramatically.

That world is a long way behind us. But, as a point of interest, as the banks made bigger profits the nation also appeared to be more prosperous than it is today. Strong banks are good for the economy.

They also make a small fortune as pointed out from other customers using their machines which could be redistributed

But they also pay out a small fortune when their own customers use another company's ATM.

and the fact the Post Office can be used is not much use due to the many many branch closure, which when you find you are in a town without one or it is closed and the only two banks in the town are HSBC and Barclays, you are then up a gum tree unless you can find somewhere to get cashback.

The post office has a representation that is several times bigger than any bank's branch network. If your bank doesn't have a branch or ATM where you are, change to a bank that does. It really isn't rocket science.

Again, it leaves the most deprevied hunting around to get at their own money when those with good credit can get at theirs very easily, comparatively.

The basic bank account market has several different types of customers in it. Some are genuinely deprived. Some use it to get cheaper air fares for their ski-ing holidays in Switzerland. Most are not deprived, they are simply financially incompetent. From my experience most basic bank account customers have a wage going in to the account. It's not just an account for people on benefits.

I beleive given that they are both government backed, these institutions should be forced to face up to their responsbilities regardless of the so called costs involved and use some of the profit to help their customers.

The overarching priority for both banks is to repay the Special Liquidity Scheme to taxpayers. Then they have a further responsibility to actually put themselves in a position where a buyer would be prepared to take on the Government's shares.

Acting as some sort of extension of the welfare state will not achieve this.

I'm not saying I actually agree with their decision. I think it will save a small amount in cost and jetison a small number of unprofitable customers to competitors. The PR damage will be greater than the P&L benefits.

But in the days of internet and telephone banking, decent ATM distribution within RBS and Nat West (good point above about the implications of the Santander sale), Faster Payments, cashback in the supermarket and pub etc there are good choice and workrounds that will allow customers to get their cash.

And I say that as somebody who lives in a town that has lost 3 bank branches in the last 18 months.

edinburgher

Basic bank account customers are definitely classed as second class citizens in my opinion and experience.

I needed a new bank account 5-6 years ago after a relationship breakdown and had to go to A&L (now Santander) for a new account. Despite running my previous account flawlessly as part of a couple (their 'best'/premium account at the time), a default after some poor financial choices (being a student ) meant they could only offer me a basic account.

It took them over 5 weeks to open it and there was a palpable air of 'what do you want?' each time I went into a branch. Access to online banking was limited and sporadic and I eventually switched to Natwest. Amusingly enough, closing my basic account with Santander was the single easiest transaction I had with them, took a teller all of 45 seconds (without making eye contact once!) This and I'd been a customer for maybe 6 years all told?

Natwest have been a breath of fresh air - friendly staff, good online functionality, a debit card and no fear of going overdrawn (although I've had my fill of that and I wouldn't do it again, anyway).

This news is definitely a pain for me - my nearest Natwest atm is 30 minutes away by bus.

Ah well, back to Halifax it is...

pbfhpunk

This isn't news today, I knew this when I applied for my Basic account nearly a month ago, it was made clear I could only use Natwest or RBS accounts. I am shocked, however, to hear that people with these account open them because they're poor. I opened mine because I already have a royalties account that our wages go into and direct debits come out and wanted another account where I could transfer money that would be our spending money for that month. Am now thinking maybe I should see about changing the Royalties gold to a basic and upgrading the account we'll be using daily.

Or does anyone know if yo ucan have 2 royalties gold accounts but only pay one fee?

noh

pbfhpunk wrote: »

This isn't news today, I knew this when I applied for my Basic account nearly a month ago, it was made clear I could only use Natwest or RBS accounts. I am shocked, however, to hear that people with these account open them because they're poor. I opened mine because I already have a royalties account that our wages go into and direct debits come out and wanted another account where I could transfer money that would be our spending money for that month. Am now thinking maybe I should see about changing the Royalties gold to a basic and upgrading the account we'll be using daily.

Or does anyone know if yo ucan have 2 royalties gold accounts but only pay one fee?

Why not just open an ordinary Select account? That has no fee.

jalexa

edinburgher wrote: »

Basic bank account customers are definitely classed as second class citizens in my opinion and experience.

This news is definitely a pain for me - my nearest Natwest atm is 30 minutes away by bus.

Ah well, back to Halifax it is...

I do recognise the staff demeanor you mention, but equally it could be demotivation as a result of management bullying and threat of "downsizing".

I was clearly informed in branch there were no plans to downgrade existing Step/Key accounts, then two days later I received my email. Either I was "lied to" (something I cannot allege as I have no evidence) or the branch staff were hopelessly unbriefed. I am prepared to believe the latter.

Why not get a Halifax EasyCash but keep your Natwest/RBS basic account, (though I have no confidence that Halifax Link access will survive the planned migration from Electron to Visa Debit). The Natwest online access (as you are aware) is excellent. Then you would have two "loss making" accounts.;) Though given your "30 minute" issue perhaps you should go through the motions of a "free" Select account upgrade application before knowing what Natwest really make of your status.

I am concerned about both financial (and rural) exclusion but I don't understand the current fuss about Natwest/RBS removing Link access. Across the country there is good access to group branded ATMs and the other existing means of access to "purchasing" and to cash.

A good number of other instutions "basic" account cards were already "hobbled", specifically LTSB, HSBC and Nationwide. Sadly the current "MSE crocodile tears" as often, misses the point, which is the other differentiations between "basic" and "full service" accounts.

pbfhpunk

noh wrote: »

Why not just open an ordinary Select account? That has no fee.

I posted that before I'd read about the slecet account! Just been on RBS and had a chat with an advisor who told me I can only upgrade in branch, great! another reason for wanting to upgrade is no RBS branch for about 30 miles and none open on a Saturday!!

She said it's only basic as it has lower credit criteria as no overdraft or chequebook. Maybe people are stigmatising the account, If you don't want an overdraft or chequebook it seems like this account is the right one to have (with RBS) doesn't mean you are poor.

jalexa

pbfhpunk wrote: »

I posted that before I'd read about the slecet account! Just been on RBS and had a chat with an advisor who told me I can only upgrade in branch, great! another reason for wanting to upgrade is no RBS branch for about 30 miles and none open on a Saturday!!

I'm not aware of any prohibition in having a Select account and a Basic. I would have a punt at just making an online application for Select. They can only say no. If you do apply make sure you make it clear your earnings will be paid in and do not request an overdraft.

noh

pbfhpunk wrote: »

I posted that before I'd read about the slecet account! Just been on RBS and had a chat with an advisor who told me I can only upgrade in branch, great! another reason for wanting to upgrade is no RBS branch for about 30 miles and none open on a Saturday!!

She said it's only basic as it has lower credit criteria as no overdraft or chequebook. Maybe people are stigmatising the account, If you don't want an overdraft or chequebook it seems like this account is the right one to have (with RBS) doesn't mean you are poor.

If I was in your situation I would simply apply for a select account online. If you are already a customer with online banking there is a shortened application process.
When you get the new account close the basic one or keep it open if you wish.

Hanky_Panky

BoGoF wrote: »

I am prepared to be shot down but numerous warnings were given that the numerous challanges to banks on fees/ppi etc etc (all encouraged by this site) would eventually lead to the end of the 'free' bank account and perhaps this is the first stop towards that ??

Exactly - there was a strong core of people on here who were pointing out that this type of intervention was ineviatble and that these 'campaigns' to reclaim charges etc were a folly and that we would all be worse off in time. We were largely drowned out in the sea of short sightedness for a quick gain.

Sure enough fees are now worse for a much larger group of people and some previously 'free' benefits such as easy withdrawl of cash have now been removed.

I find it faintly sickening that comments like this can be made: 'Dan Plant, MoneySavingExpert.com money analyst, says: "This is an outrageous, regressive move by RBS, which will punish the least well-off in society.' Face up to it fella ! This is in part your doing.