quick question, is it better to use a bank with a local branch?

Cass85

Its peace of mind, a kind of safety net which can be nice but you could be foregoing a better deal with someone else for it.

thatsean

If it's a basic account you're after some banks wont deal with you in branch. HBOS for example have a phone for basic account holders to use. If you need counter access you need to check this out.

JuicyJesus

happymummy wrote: »

Just looked at Clydesdale bank website, they charge £34.50 for every unpaid dd or such like, won't be going there then!!

Or just don't bounce Direct Debits...

But anyway, as BasfordLad said Clydesdale seem to be very much "branch-based", with virtually everything requiring going to your branch.

NatWest seem to be similar in some ways. The concept of an "account holding branch" being where you need to go for any sort of query is an anachronism these days and died with the dinosaurs. I won't bother with any institution that, in an age of networking and computers, requires me to be at a specific location to do something except where it actually makes sense (e.g. security failure on the telephone/Internet).

For all their faults, direct channel banking is one thing Halifax got very, very right, and something HSBC in particular seem to excel at.

happymummy

I'm hoping failed direct debits will be a thing of the past very soon!

Agricolae

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Or just don't bounce Direct Debits...

But anyway, as BasfordLad said Clydesdale seem to be very much "branch-based", with virtually everything requiring going to your branch.

NatWest seem to be similar in some ways. The concept of an "account holding branch" being where you need to go for any sort of query is an anachronism these days and died with the dinosaurs. I won't bother with any institution that, in an age of networking and computers, requires me to be at a specific location to do something except where it actually makes sense (e.g. security failure on the telephone/Internet).

For all their faults, direct channel banking is one thing Halifax got very, very right, and something HSBC in particular seem to excel at.

Speaking as a customer, the fact that NatWest would require me to visit a branch to reactivate unused ISAs is one thing which particularly irks me (I can do this online with Halifax). What's worse is the fact that the bank actively encourages customers not to do business with the branches (e.g. by disconnecting the branch phone lines), and then when a customer calls customer services they are told to go to a branch to do x or y. :rotfl:

I think a major issue with "call centre based" or "online based" banks is that the frontline staff, be they on the phones or in webchat environments, know nothing about how their branches operate. A branch would be able to explain how their quick deposit machine works (for example), and what could have caused a customer's deposit to be lost. Staff in the call centres wouldn't know this and are at risk of either a) giving out the wrong information or b) having to send the customer into the branch, which defeats the object of encouraging customers to call in/log on to ask questions anyway.

System

Bank of Scotland gives full counter access to both BOS and Halifax branded basic accounts. The choice is basically between having a Visa Electron with LINK access or Visa Debit with only group ATM access.

thatsean wrote: »

If it's a basic account you're after some banks wont deal with you in branch. HBOS for example have a phone for basic account holders to use. If you need counter access you need to check this out.

You could try online for a Halifax Reward Account; even if you get their standard current account this doesn't have any failed Direct Debit fees and can be operated in BOS branches

happymummy wrote: »

I'm hoping failed direct debits will be a thing of the past very soon!

JuicyJesus

zagubov wrote: »

I've heard it suggested you should have an account in the most affluent area near you - supposed to maker overdrafts easier when you need them, rumour has it.

Utter b*llocks.

rb10

zagubov wrote: »

I've heard it suggested you should have an account in the most affluent area near you - supposed to maker overdrafts easier when you need them, rumour has it.

The only way in which location may come into credit scoring is of your home address - the branch at which the account was opened will have no impact at all.

zagubov

rb10 wrote: »

The only way in which location may come into credit scoring is of your home address - the branch at which the account was opened will have no impact at all.

I remember it from years ago when the economy was probably healthier than now. The argument was that managers in affluent areas were more used to debtors setttling their debts compared with areas where people couldn't. So if you moved from an affluent to a less affluent area it might not be wise to move the account to the new branch.

Further, keeping the same account longer would help your credit score (all else ebing equal).

Maybe bank managers don't have the discretion any more. Wouldn't surprise me in the box-ticking century we're in now.

JuicyJesus wrote: »

Utter b*llocks.

Yeah, might be difficult for some people to follow.:D

rb10

zagubov wrote: »

I remember it from years ago when the economy was probably healthier than now. The argument was that managers in affluent areas were more used to debtors setttling their debts compared with areas where people couldn't. So if you moved from an affluent to a less affluent area it might not be wise to move the account to the new branch.

Haha, how archaic!

No chance of that having any effect now - a computer makes the decision based on the facts about the customer. Which branch they happened to walk into isn't one of them.