MSE News: An anatomy of banks: When Martin Lewis met Barclays

opinions4u

Consumerist wrote: »

An interesting point but that's what the energy companies are effectively expected to do. Is there a case for extending the general idea to banks too?

Really? I thought energy companies just had to highlight their cheapest tariff.

Please correct me if I'm wrong - I know little about energy companies, except the British Gas are the most incompetent firm I've ever dealt with.

Consumerist

opinions4u wrote: »

Really? I thought energy companies just had to highlight their cheapest tariff.

Please correct me if I'm wrong - I know little about energy companies, except the British Gas are the most incompetent firm I've ever dealt with.

Under <Ofgem's Retail Market Review> :-

Our focus on transparency and direct communication is designed to make the system clearer by:
. . .
exploring a possible scheme whereby suppliers are obliged to offer their vulnerable customers and others who have not switched for some time, a personalised estimate on the cheapest tariff from across the energy market.

So it's not yet certain but it seems to be on the cards in some circumstances.

caper7

John1993 wrote: »

That's just horrible!

What next, you go into Tesco for some beans and they have a big sign up with an offer for reduced price meat?!

You should demand compensation, I think, or maybe just move banks. I mean, who'd have thought it, a company asking a customer you were interested in their other products?

I believed the article, at least in part, was on Barclays curbing their cross selling.
I therefore only commented that they still do, in my experience, constantly attempt to sell me things when I contact them.
The last call lasted three times longer than necessary because of this.
I am perfectly able to decline their offers, I am not claiming any distress, and do not require compensation. But many thanks for your concern.

I would also point out that signs in shops promoting other products or offers do not actually take up much extra time. One looks at them, and ignores them if uninterested. A salesperson being supremely polite but nevertheless attempting to prolong the conversation at every turn does actually take up my time, unless I were to be extremely rude and just hang up.

John1993_2

Consumerist wrote: »

An interesting point but that's what the energy companies are effectively expected to do. Is there a case for extending the general idea to banks too?

No. We already seem to have far too many people who think that the banks operate as public services. I don't think that pushing them further down this route is a good idea, as it just leads to ever less reasonable exppectations about what they offer.

Archi_Bald

John1993 wrote: »

No. We already seem to have far too many people who think that the banks operate as public services. I don't think that pushing them further down this route is a good idea, as it just leads to ever less reasonable exppectations about what they offer.

And we would all see additional charges to be levied, e.g. in the form of a monthly account fee for current accounts.

Comparing credit cards with energy tariffs is comparing apples with pears. It is dead easy to find balance transfer credit cards, whilst it is a minor nightmare to try and work through the jungle of different energy tariffs. The needs for energy are very simple - - you need electricity, and you need gas. The needs for someone who is overdrawn, or wants a loan, are massively more complex.

Also, why would anyone want financial advice from a bank, even if they were made to potentially send you to their competitors? Who would be regulating / controlling that they do indeed give the right advice? And, as above, who would be paying for them to provide this service?

Isn't it time that people assume a bit more responsibility for their own affairs, and don't constantly look for somebody else to blame. Everyone seems to be on the Internet these days, chatting and socialising round the clock. Everybody can find cheap food and cheap clothes and cheap tattoo shops and cheap nail bars - - surely it is just as easy to find the cheapest way to borrow money, too? There's almost nobody these days who hasn't heard of MSE and/or comparison sites.

Wywth

Never forget Barclays involvement in supporting Apartheid in South Africa - support which arguably delayed the liberation by a generation

http://www.news24.com/Columnists/Archive/JonQwelane/Barclays-role-in-apartheid-20050513

Barclays eventually pulled out of South Africa in 1986 amid rising pressure and the consequent bid to quell the distaste for this bank in countries like the UK at the time ... but I fear the damage was already done.

Even today, Barclays continues to bankroll the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2007/jan/28/accounts.Zimbabwenews

Consumerist

Archi_Bald wrote: »

. . . Isn't it time that people assume a bit more responsibility for their own affairs, and don't constantly look for somebody else to blame. . .

I'm not sure I entirely agree with all you say although I understand your general direction.

Take, for example, the case of a balance transfer to a credit card. Yes, it's "dead easy" to find one but how ma[n]y people still don't fully understand the booby traps set by the banks if you spend on the same card after you've transferred a balance onto it?

I'd say the banking jungle is every bit as complex as the energy jungle. .

Consumerist

Wywth wrote: »

. . . Even today, Barclays continues to bankroll the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2007/jan/28/accounts.Zimbabwenews

That article is dated 28 January 2007.

Hardly "today" unless you're some sort of Methuselah. .

JuicyJesus

opinions4u wrote: »

Have I really just read an article where the great Martin Lewis implies that Barclays Bank staff should tell customers with interest bearing Barclaycard debt to hop over the road to Halifax and take out a 0% card?

I'm all for encouraging people to seek out the best deal on the market. But to expect Barclays to do anything beyond identify the best deal from their own product range is ridiculous.

Personally I would say that, even in the context of only offering Barclays products, adding credit card balances to your mortgage is poor advice - it converts an unsecured debt to a secured one, and can lead to (worse) problems with negative equity down the road.

But that is a staff training issue. Not one with cross-selling in general. Cross-selling of actually profitable products is how banks make money, subsidising free current accounts for practically everyone. Again, so long as it is done fairly, honestly and with regard to consumer preference (i.e. there should be a clear opt-out from marketing activity, as Halifax had for some years) I see no issue whatsoever.

matttye

opinions4u wrote: »

Have I really just read an article where the great Martin Lewis implies that Barclays Bank staff should tell customers with interest bearing Barclaycard debt to hop over the road to Halifax and take out a 0% card?

I'm all for encouraging people to seek out the best deal on the market. But to expect Barclays to do anything beyond identify the best deal from their own product range is ridiculous.

Did you read the entire article?

"It read: "Our commitment to you. At Barclays our staff receive no sales incentive or commissions. Our only focus is on providing you with great service and helping you meet your financial needs."

If their only focus is on providing a great service and helping you meet your financial needs, why wouldnt they send you off down the road if a better product suits your needs?

Clearly there's still a certain amount of BS and spin.