Halifax won't let me open a savings account without seeing an advisor?

GeorgeHowell

I don't buy a lot of what I've read here. The duty of care, such as it is, is to make sure that people enter into things with their eyes open, and are not misled by unwittingly, or deliberately false, misleading, or incomplete information, or by being sold products which are patently unsuitable for them. If someone just wants to open a simple in/out bank account and feels empowered to do so without seeking any advice then it's difficult to see why they should have to see anyone, especially (as has been stated) since they could do so online without seeing anyone.

It's all about banks sucking in the 'muppets' in order to push want they want them to have, rather than what may be best for the customers. Again my advice is to ignore the Halifax apologists and go elsewhere, whether they care or not.

jonmcclelland

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

It's all about banks sucking in the 'muppets' in order to push want they want them to have, rather than what may be best for the customers. Again my advice is to ignore the Halifax apologists and go elsewhere, whether they care or not.

it's a double-edged sword and yes, banks will try to cross-promote their products and tell you about the other ways they can help you but if you're not interested, then you dont have to have it. like it or not, regulatory requirements are in place to protect you just as much as to protect them and I can't see that changing any time soon.

GeorgeHowell

jonmcclelland wrote: »

it's a double-edged sword and yes, banks will try to cross-promote their products and tell you about the other ways they can help you but if you're not interested, then you dont have to have it. like it or not, regulatory requirements are in place to protect you just as much as to protect them and I can't see that changing any time soon.

Fair comment. But I can't help feeling that the banks which choose to implement the regulatory requirements by insisting that people visit branches and sit down with someone have an ulterior motive beyond just ensuring that they stay compliant.

ses6jwg

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Fair comment. But I can't help feeling that the banks which choose to implement the regulatory requirements by insisting that people visit branches and sit down with someone have an ulterior motive beyond just ensuring that they stay compliant.

of course there is. they're a business out to make a profit and a highly competitive one at that.

Just like almost every other single retail sector they're vying for your business.

You can't walk into Smiths nowadays without being offered cut price chocolate or Greggs without being upsold a meal deal, or sign up for car insurance without being offered breakdown cover.

banking is no different

nilrem_2

Macca83 wrote: »

There are other banks who would be more than happy to take your money. But you'll still find yourself sitting in front of a banking advisor regardless of where you end up.

Not all banks insist on seeing an advisor, It's one of the reasons I have accounts with Nationwide. I decide what account I want and call in and open it without any appointment and they are happy to accept my money.

In fact I did just that 2 weeks ago!

GeorgeHowell

ses6jwg wrote: »

of course there is. they're a business out to make a profit and a highly competitive one at that.

Just like almost every other single retail sector they're vying for your business.

You can't walk into Smiths nowadays without being offered cut price chocolate or Greggs without being upsold a meal deal, or sign up for car insurance without being offered breakdown cover.

banking is no different

All true, but that doesn't make it right. Financial matters are usually far more important than any of those examples. People's life savings and pensions could be at stake. The public needs protecting against sharks, and that protection still often isn't adequate. To say that the buyer must beware, and that commercial profit-making concerns are entitled to pursue their main aims is not good enough.

George_Mainwaring

opinions4u wrote: »

As for your stocks and shares ISA problem I can only guess that you saw a Banking Adviser who couldn't sell the product and needed to refer you to an authorised Financial Adviser.

No, I opened the cash ISA with a banking advisor and then asked to put the rest of the year's allowance into a S&S ISA. They said they couldn't do that and that I'd need to speak to one of their financial advisers. I said OK but he said all the appointments were full for the next 2-3 weeks and then went to get the branch manager, who instantly said to come back the following morning, despite the computer not accepting the booking. The manager was clearly very keen to keep me as a customer.

The next day I went back and saw the advisor. Went through all the usual questions and points, such as him pointing out he could only offer products from their group etc. Naturally he also was keen to do a recommendation for the rest of my savings, not just the ISA. Went back a week later to actually take the thing out after he's posted me his reports/recommendations only to be told they couldn't offer me anything and I was shown the door (which I had to open myself to get out this time unlike before, when I had my hand shook, the door was opened and I was walked to the foyer and warmly greeted goodbye).

The explanations of why I was refused a £5K ISA were irrational.

opinions4u wrote: »

You still have the choice of going elsewhere and buying on a non advised basis.

Or was there more to it?

No there was no more than that other than the facts and figures that would illustrate how irrational they were being. But there was no issue with any credit or fraud checks they may have ran or anything like that. It was clear to the advisor that I fully understood everything he had said, including that the value might go down and there would be penalties if I tried to cash-in within three years. It appeared to be the management above him who had said no after he'd already posted me his reports/recommendations.

As for going elsewhere, I'm certainly not going back to a high street bank.

George_Mainwaring

opinions4u wrote: »

It simply isn't cost effective to hire, train and then fire staff to cover branch demand in the ISA season. The training and selling authorisation takes months.

Well that's what I was getting at when I said they wouldn't trust temporary staff not to get them into more trouble with the FSA. Mind you, if temporary staff can't be trusted in banks, it's a shame the post office are happy to hire people at Christmas who either post things through the wrong letterboxes or steal letters with money inside! I know it's stupid to ever send cash in the post, but some old people just won't learn, and I've only ever known money to go missing at Christmas.

However, given that so many banks have laid people off in recent years, what about offering temp work to former banking staff gone freelance? They have the training and are familiar with all the procedures and rules, and can be disposed of as soon as they're no longer needed.

I doubt banks would trust them either!

poisonheart666

surreysaver wrote: »

Well, no, because the account I want I know the money is locked in for five years, or at least if I withdraw it before five years I lose 165 days interest. Which in effect means if I close it less than 165 days after I open it I will get back less than what I put in. It is not rocket science. So in the event my 5 year old wants to put down a deposit on a house when he's nine, he won't get as much money as I thought he would...

Just goes to show you need an appointment with an advisor, if the account you want to open is a five year fixed rate term you would actually lose 365 days worth of interest not 165.

What is the fuss? procedure is to have an appointment...make one and get on with it. Waste of your time and anyone elses to sit and complain about it.

After everything that happened with PPI banks have to follow regulation and cover all the terms and conditions. You may have read the t&cs on the website but it doesnt mean everything is on there and if something wasn't covered sounds to me like you would complain about that too

opinions4u

poisonheart666 wrote: »

Just goes to show you need an appointment with an advisor, if the account you want to open is a five year fixed rate term you would actually lose 365 days worth of interest not 165.

What is the fuss? procedure is to have an appointment...make one and get on with it. Waste of your time and anyone elses to sit and complain about it.

If you don't want people to air their complaints it rather undermines the purpose of the forum.

There was a day when a cashier could open a new account in five minutes. There was a day when a customer could fill a form in and drop it off with a cheque and everything would be sorted and posted out.

I do understand why people are slightly bemused when they are told they need an appointment to do something that was once simple.

Yes, it is what it is and people have to get on with it. But it doesn't mean they can't question the status quo. A Halifax online customer can open a new account in about 30 seconds. It's frustrating that a branch takes significantly longer. It's frustrating that kids accounts cannot be opened online.

After everything that happened with PPI banks have to follow regulation and cover all the terms and conditions. You may have read the t&cs on the website but it doesnt mean everything is on there and if something wasn't covered sounds to me like you would complain about that too

You highlight the concerns of the customer quite well here.

They used to be able to go in, open an account and walk out with exactly what they wanted.

Now thy have to go in, answer a set of broader questions (to ensure compliance with FSA "informed choice" rules), have a range of other accounts briefly summarised and then make their choice. Invariably exactly what they knew they wanted at the outset.

Such a process, while compliant, inevitably identifies other needs. Move your current account and credit card and be £120 a year better off. Shift your mortgage over and save £hundreds. Take out our home insurance and get better cover.

All this is fine, except people now mistrust banks. They don't want a spiel. The spiel is what sold them ever increasing debt. The spiel is what left them with a PPI policy that was overpriced, charged interest on the lump sum and only provided limited cover when it sounded like it should do so much more.

On the whole customers want good service, reliability and security for their money, together with a half decent price.

In a perfect world the CEO of a bank would be brave and set about changing the sales culture. Focus incentive schemes on staff morale, training and qualifications alongside customer satisfaction and retention.

Change the dialogue within the organisation from "how many accounts have we sold" to "how happy are our customers with our service and products".

Long term it will pay for them to do this. Short term they haven't got the guts. They need to recapitalise and [STRIKE]flogging more stuff[/STRIKE] meeting as many customer needs as possible now is the easiest way to do this.

I don't see any real sign of and branch network of any bank changing to a customer centric way of operating. It's a shame. There is a real opportunity to be different.