Santander to close 95 branches

Exodi

Rob5342 said:

Exodi said:

GeoffTF said:

Rob5342 said:

sonofmerton said:

I understand that the elderly, those that can't use the internet, are struggling. 

It must be a pretty tiny number of people now, using an aop on an ipad takes no more skill than opening and reading a bank statement sent in the post. 

I tried to teach an elderly lady to do it. Her eyesight was very poor (Age Related Macular Degeneration). She also had very poor dexterity. She kept accidentally touching the screen at random locations. She got absolutely nowhere. An iPad is impossibly difficult to use for some people. I suggested a desktop PC with a mouse and a large screen, but she was not interested.

There's also a secondary issue about trust (older people can be quite untrusting of technology, so may prefer to visit a branch, even if they could use an app or an ATM).

The number must be very small now though, and will carry on dwindling. Someone who is 70 today will have only been 27 when home computers like the Commodore 64 came out.

I think it's much more common than you give it credit for. Aside from having family members like this myself, and others in this thread clearly having similar experiences, it was only last week we informed staff members at my company that all payslips were now to be emailed out (instead of printed and handed out in envelopes) - it was no longer optional.

We had a staff member come in and go off on a long-winded rant about how it puts her security at risk (the payslips are password protected), then when questioned about how she handles other forms of transactions, responds that she pays cash everywhere possible, as she can get a physical receipt which she can store which proves that she paid for something. When I remarked that she must have a big store room to hold all of the tens of thousands of receipts she has presumably accumulated over the years, and mentioned that I can access the details about any payment online in seconds on each companies website, I was told that I'll see the error of my ways when the internet goes down and I realise I have nothing. I responded saying that if the internet was irrevocably unavailable then I'd have more things to worry about than trying to access a receipt for a purchase, as presumably we'd be in the midst of World War 3.

She's 'only' 65.

My stepfather (the one I described earlier) keeps five figures in cash in his house. Even on this forum, you still have a significant amount of people jumping on the bandwagon with the loonies waving the flag 'cash is king'. (I know I've likely just shook the hornets nest there...)

You are right in your sentiment though, I think these kinds of views (technology = bad, cash = good) will largely die out with the baby boomers.

GeoffTF

molerat said:

Won't use an outdoor cash machine, she goes into branch and withdraws cash

I very rarely use ATMs, but I would have thought that was plain common sense. It is several years since I used an ATM at a branch, but I always used one of those indoors. I thought everyone did the same, unless they were in a hurry and all the indoor ATMs were busy.

The new Santander branch in the city where I live has only outdoor ATMs. Perhaps they are doing that to reduce the number of people coming into the branch, so that they can close it down.

If I was withdrawing a large amount of cash (more than £50 say), I would do it is stages to reduce the risk of being mugged. Carrying cash is risky, so I try to avoid it.

Exodi

GeoffTF said:

molerat said:

Won't use an outdoor cash machine, she goes into branch and withdraws cash

I very rarely use ATMs, but I would have thought that was plain common sense. It is several years since I used an ATM at a branch, but I always used one of those indoors. I thought everyone did the same, unless they were in a hurry and all the indoor ATMs were busy.

The new Santander branch in the city where I live has only outdoor ATMs. Perhaps they are doing that to reduce the number of people coming into the branch, so that they can close it down.

If I was withdrawing a large amount of cash (more than £50 say), I would do it is stages to reduce the risk of being mugged. Carrying cash is risky, so I try to avoid it.

Out of interest, what is your fear about ATM's outdoors?

Is it a fear that there will be a secret camera or a card skimming device installed? Or that when the cash comes out you'll be shoved aside by an opportunistic thief? Or something else?

You may call it common sense, though I'd suggest it's irrational paranoia... at the very least I can confirm everyone does not in fact do the same. Do you use a contactless bank card?

Your comment about withdrawing cash also piques my interest. If you were needing to withdraw a large amount of cash (let's say you needed to withdraw £500 for a sofa or a bookcase or a laptop or something) - how would you do it?

Would you venture backwards and forwards in 10 round trips to the local branch to use the ATM inside?

GeoffTF

Exodi said:

GeoffTF said:

molerat said:

Won't use an outdoor cash machine, she goes into branch and withdraws cash

I very rarely use ATMs, but I would have thought that was plain common sense. It is several years since I used an ATM at a branch, but I always used one of those indoors. I thought everyone did the same, unless they were in a hurry and all the indoor ATMs were busy.

The new Santander branch in the city where I live has only outdoor ATMs. Perhaps they are doing that to reduce the number of people coming into the branch, so that they can close it down.

If I was withdrawing a large amount of cash (more than £50 say), I would do it is stages to reduce the risk of being mugged. Carrying cash is risky, so I try to avoid it.

Out of interest, what is your fear about ATM's outdoors?

Is it a fear that there will be a secret camera or a card skimming device installed? Or that when the cash comes out you'll be shoved aside by an opportunistic thief? Or something else?

You may call it common sense, though I'd suggest it's irrational paranoia... at the very least I can confirm everyone does not in fact do the same. Do you use a contactless bank card?

Your comment about withdrawing cash also piques my interest. If you were needing to withdraw a large amount of cash (let's say you needed to withdraw £500 for a sofa or a bookcase or a laptop or something) - how would you do it?

Would you venture backwards and forwards in 10 round trips to the local branch to use the ATM inside?

By walking a few yards, I reduce the risk that a mugger will see me drawing out cash, follow me and use violence to take the money from me. (They are not likely to be hanging around in the bank.) Why go to the ATM that is more exposed?

I use a contactless card to pay for groceries. I wear scruffy clothes and use a downmarket contactless card with very little money on it, and buy in small quantities.

I have a large supermarket at the end of the road. If I need cash, I get it when I am there, a bit at a time. I buy larger items online from reputable retailers with a credit card.

Looking poor and not worth mugging has worked so far.

eskbanker

GeoffTF said:

Looking poor and not worth mugging has worked so far.

That sounds like confusing correlation with causation, or is there statistically significant evidence of local muggers specifically targeting well-dressed victims?

Rob5342

I'm always careful when using a cash machine in case there are any potential muggers asking. I usually use the machines inside Asds rather than the one outside the Sainsbury's local. The risk is probably quite small but they are both equally convenient so I choose the inside one. That said, i rarely withdrew cash these days, normally only when I want to go to the chip shop who annoyingly don't take cards. 

UKX69

Exodi said:

GeoffTF said:

molerat said:

Won't use an outdoor cash machine, she goes into branch and withdraws cash

I very rarely use ATMs, but I would have thought that was plain common sense. It is several years since I used an ATM at a branch, but I always used one of those indoors. I thought everyone did the same, unless they were in a hurry and all the indoor ATMs were busy.

The new Santander branch in the city where I live has only outdoor ATMs. Perhaps they are doing that to reduce the number of people coming into the branch, so that they can close it down.

If I was withdrawing a large amount of cash (more than £50 say), I would do it is stages to reduce the risk of being mugged. Carrying cash is risky, so I try to avoid it.

Out of interest, what is your fear about ATM's outdoors?

Is it a fear that there will be a secret camera or a card skimming device installed? Or that when the cash comes out you'll be shoved aside by an opportunistic thief? Or something else?

You may call it common sense, though I'd suggest it's irrational paranoia... at the very least I can confirm everyone does not in fact do the same. Do you use a contactless bank card?

Your comment about withdrawing cash also piques my interest. If you were needing to withdraw a large amount of cash (let's say you needed to withdraw £500 for a sofa or a bookcase or a laptop or something) - how would you do it?

Would you venture backwards and forwards in 10 round trips to the local branch to use the ATM inside?

I bank with NatWest and my local branch has an ATM inside as well as outside, but around the corner in a quiet side street. A few years ago, I arrived at the side street ATM just as a mugger robbed a woman of her cash and ran off down the street with a taxi driver giving chase. After that I wrote to NatWest asking if the ATM could be moved to a more prominent position. No chance they said, the bank is a listed building that forbids it and anyway, there’s a machine inside. 😳

On the subject of Santander, our branch - only a spit length from NatWest - is being turned into a counter less branch. Not surprising as I rarely go in there myself. The last time was last year when I had to visit to complete some details (can’t remember what), for an account switch offer. Nobody there so the branch manager must have been bored and so he completed the switch for me there and then. Almost made me want to stay with them. 😅

GeoffTF

eskbanker said:

GeoffTF said:

Looking poor and not worth mugging has worked so far.

That sounds like confusing correlation with causation, or is there statistically significant evidence of local muggers specifically targeting well-dressed victims?

I do not know. I get the impression that you are more likely to be mugged if you are wearing a Rolex than a Casio. I also expect that you are more likely to be mugged if you drive a Bentley rather than an old banger. Similarly, I expect that you are more likely to be a victim of crime if you live in a mansion rather than an estate house. I asked Google:

https://professionalsecurity.co.uk/news/vertical-markets/crime-survey-of-wealthy/

Wealthy people do seem to be more likely to be victims of crime, but the criminals have to know that they are wealthy. There are plenty of multi-millionaires who acquired their money by investing it rather than spending it, so perhaps the raw statistics do not tell the whole story here.

eskbanker

GeoffTF said:

eskbanker said:

GeoffTF said:

Looking poor and not worth mugging has worked so far.

That sounds like confusing correlation with causation, or is there statistically significant evidence of local muggers specifically targeting well-dressed victims?

I do not know. I get the impression that you are more likely to be mugged if you are wearing a Rolex than a Casio. I also expect that you are more likely to be mugged if you drive a Bentley rather than an old banger. Similarly, I expect that you are more likely to be a victim of crime if you live in a mansion rather than an estate house. I asked Google:

https://professionalsecurity.co.uk/news/vertical-markets/crime-survey-of-wealthy/

Wealthy people do seem to be more likely to be victims of crime, but the criminals have to know that they are wealthy. There are plenty of multi-millionaires who acquired their money by investing it rather than spending it, so perhaps the raw statistics do not tell the whole story here.

It doesn't seem particularly surprising that Professional Security magazine would publish a piece asserting that those with bigger houses are at higher risk of burglary, given their obvious vested interest!  However, even looking at it neutrally, there would be a more obvious cause and effect when it comes to which properties are more likely to be targeted by burglars, whereas I doubt it would be as clear-cut in the world of opportunistic muggers - I can imagine that anyone choosing to flaunt plenty of bling might be increasing their personal risk, but wouldn't see any significance in clothing choices for Joe Public on the average high street....

GeoffTF

eskbanker said:

GeoffTF said:

eskbanker said:

GeoffTF said:

Looking poor and not worth mugging has worked so far.

That sounds like confusing correlation with causation, or is there statistically significant evidence of local muggers specifically targeting well-dressed victims?

I do not know. I get the impression that you are more likely to be mugged if you are wearing a Rolex than a Casio. I also expect that you are more likely to be mugged if you drive a Bentley rather than an old banger. Similarly, I expect that you are more likely to be a victim of crime if you live in a mansion rather than an estate house. I asked Google:

https://professionalsecurity.co.uk/news/vertical-markets/crime-survey-of-wealthy/

Wealthy people do seem to be more likely to be victims of crime, but the criminals have to know that they are wealthy. There are plenty of multi-millionaires who acquired their money by investing it rather than spending it, so perhaps the raw statistics do not tell the whole story here.

It doesn't seem particularly surprising that Professional Security magazine would publish a piece asserting that those with bigger houses are at higher risk of burglary, given their obvious vested interest!  However, even looking at it neutrally, there would be a more obvious cause and effect when it comes to which properties are more likely to be targeted by burglars, whereas I doubt it would be as clear-cut in the world of opportunistic muggers - I can imagine that anyone choosing to flaunt plenty of bling might be increasing their personal risk, but wouldn't see any significance in clothing choices for Joe Public on the average high street....

Google also turned up references investigating the assertion that poor people are more likely to be subject to crime. If you cannot afford good security you are more likely to be a victim. If you live an area that has a large number of people in absolute poverty or perceive themselves as being in relative poverty, that may also be a factor.

I moved to the periphery of a northern city after I retired. I did not have to pay stamp duty because Gordon Brown thought my house was in a deprived area. The city as whole has crime rate substantially above the national average, particularly for violence and sexual crime, but not thefts from the person. My immediate area has a crime rate substantially below the national average, with zero thefts from the person, but with lots of violence and sexual crime. I was shocked to see the reports for the surrounding streets. I do not think I am particularly at risk, but it is wise to be careful.