Bank branches closing - whose fault is it?

Twopints

Jlawson118 wrote: »

I wouldn't really say anybody is to blame as such, but it's the way the times are evolving. We live in the computer era now, where we do our shopping online, communicate with friends and family online, and now our banking.

I posted on another thread a few weeks back about First Direct, and how they were once ahead of their game being online and telephone only, but now every bank is moving that way with wages being paid in by BACS, new technologies allowing people to send money just by a phone number, etc. We, as customers, see this as the easier option (if you are a keen technology user that is).

But it is unfortunate that branches are closing, especially for the social reasons that you mentioned. I can't remember where I saw it, but I read a while back that Halifax are rolling out machine only branches. Which is all well and good again, if you can use them. My grandma for example, is a complete technophobe. Since my grandad passed away, she won't even have the television on. She likes the ability to go to the bank and speak to a real person to deposit or withdraw. She wouldn't have a clue on using a machine.

But then there's the financial side of this. It's cheaper for banks to hire a team to manage the reliability of online banking and teams of call centres to handle calls, than it is to pay rent, bills and even staff to run branches scattered around towns.

My wages have been paid by BACS since 1979 when I started my first job - not sure this qualifies as something new that is causing banks to close branches. :beer:

enthusiasticsaver

I think it is a combination of reasons. 10 years ago we had five branches of banks/building societies in our local town. Now we have one, just Lloyds. However the majority of us don't need to go into branches beyond maybe showing id in the case of opening or closing accounts and even that can be done by post now sometimes. Online banking, use of cards rather than cash and the fact that many financial services providers are branchless anyway. Why should the banks pay out for keeping the smaller branches open on the off chance a few people who don't like online banking can use them. They can always use the post offices.


Same goes for bookshops, small hardware stores, electrical appliance independents etc. Shopping habits have changed and we now have out of town shopping malls or buy online via amazon, argos direct etc etc. If you have access to a smart phone/tablet or laptop you don't need to physically travel outside your home to buy goods/services beyond haircuts or visit cafes/restaurants etc. It is only clothes really that I don't buy online. Anything for the house, holidays, financial services, books, dvds etc I buy online.

KxMx

Barny1979 wrote: »

Had the example a couple of months ago when paying a cheque in, was advised I could do it through App and it would clear on Monday from the previous Friday, if I paid it over the counter, was advised it would clear on Thursday, so they are encouraging people to go online.

Faster cheque clearance (via Digital Imaging) is available in some bank branches, soon to be all.

Tallaght

Most banks blame closures on banking online.Most of their old branch premises remain vacant after closure creating an eyesore.

PDC

The two services I had with my local bank got sold off by them to third parties so I have rarely have had occasion to visit since that. Somewhat annoying though as the reason I went through the bank for those things was so I would be able to vist them and discuss changes as and when.

jonesMUFCforever

Tallaght wrote: »

Most banks blame closures on banking online.Most of their old branch premises remain vacant after closure creating an eyesore.

Most bank branches were sold and leased back in the early 2000's - nice profit on the balance sheet but a lot of expense for future years. As leases come up for renewal more will go.

discat11

It's inevitable, however when my own banks local (to my office) branch closed recently I vowed the moment they closed the one in my home town (quite a large town) I would consider moving from them (after 30+ years using them).
If I'm going to be restricted to not having a branch I'll look at all the online alternatives and choose the best, this is the risk they run in closing branches.

Jlawson118

Twopints wrote: »

My wages have been paid by BACS since 1979 when I started my first job - not sure this qualifies as something new that is causing banks to close branches. :beer:

Well no, I wouldn't say BACS itself is new, but the way we use our banking certainly is. Back in 1979 you didn't log into your internet banking to see if you'd been paid, and if so, transfer some of it into your savings within seconds. To do anything like that it was still a case of walking into a branch and talking to real people.

I was born in the mid-90s so I'm not really clued up on the late 70s. But it's like what a few other people have mentioned on this thread, we are heading towards a cashless society, and in a way it's what I was trying to get at. Wages are paid electronically, a lot of us manage our bank accounts digitally, and nowadays wages are paid in, direct debits straight back out. Again, a lot of people used to visit the banks to pay bills, this is something not often done anymore.

I visited London in July and still can't get over a busker not far from the London Eye, she was singing, playing the guitar and had a contactless card reader with a note "no change? Tap your card to send £2" :rotfl: Which in a way made me think it's a great idea, matching with how London is going mostly cashless, but also quite clever because people can't turn around and say they've got no change :cool:

JuicyJesus

Jlawson118 wrote: »

I visited London in July and still can't get over a busker not far from the London Eye, she was singing, playing the guitar and had a contactless card reader with a note "no change? Tap your card to send £2" :rotfl: Which in a way made me think it's a great idea, matching with how London is going mostly cashless, but also quite clever because people can't turn around and say they've got no change :cool:

It's a nice enough idea but there's no way in hell I'd touch my card to a contactless reader where I couldn't see the amount I was going to be charged ahead of time. (Excepting things like TfL, obviously.)

eskbanker

Jlawson118 wrote: »

I visited London in July and still can't get over a busker not far from the London Eye, she was singing, playing the guitar and had a contactless card reader with a note "no change? Tap your card to send £2" :rotfl:

I bet I know what she was playing....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeWjEYhk7Xo