Face-to-face banking access to be reviewed

Section62

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82054215#Comment_82054215

As a bank shareholder I understand profits sometimes depend on keeping customers happy, and also reducing losses.

I also understand the bank I own a tiny fraction of will probably be on the hook for refunding customers who have been scammed (in some circumstances) and therefore reducing losses due to customers being scammed has the potential to increase profit, and therefore the dividend I get. There's also a moral/ethical dimension about allowing money to get into criminal hands.

So as a shareholder I would want the bank to make it relatively easy for customers to get in touch if they have concerns about a phone call/payment/transaction - it may already be too late to stop the criminals profiting, but it is more likely to be too late if the only service being provided is a message saying "Please call back after 9am on Monday", or an email address with no indication how quickly a response will be made.

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82055592#Comment_82055592

There are already rules about when a bank can close a branch. Banking hubs are being promoted, but they do not seem to offer more than a post office. It is not clear what more can be reasonably done. There are no rules requiring the new banks to have branch networks, and perhaps that is unfair. There are a few people who need face to face banking, but most of us do not use it at all.

confederated

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82055793#Comment_82055793

I'm clearly not explaining my position well enough. I was bemoaning the fact that banks close branches or do not operate any at all - which is fine by me - but some of the money they save (or have no need to spend if they have no branch network) could to be ploughed into an enhanced telephone service where customers can talk to their bank 24/7. I can't believe people bank with the likes of LHV which offers no telephone support whatsoever. I've heard from someone who had an issue with their LHV debit card while abroad, and the only way to contact the bank was with an email - and a month later they're still waiting for a response. That should not be allowed and the regulator should impose a minimum standard of customer support. You still haven't said whether you agree or disagree with me on this. I don't want to argue about anything else.

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82055845#Comment_82055845

I do not want to argue about anything, but I do not agree. It is a competitive and highly regulated market market. I get 24/7 telephone banking from Santander. People can choose which banks they want to use.

Nasqueron

US has better bank access in part because the towns and cities are so far apart but more because they pay through the nose for it. The US allowed (maybe still allows), for example a bank for someone with no money but a cheque paid to process several deductions first + impose fees for each, then pay in the cheque that would have covered the deductions.

born_again

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82054200#Comment_82054200

 There are occasions when things go wrong - an unexpected transaction in the account, or an inadvertent subscription to a service using CCA and to be able to speak to someone at the bank is essential.

All banks do have a phone service. Just the vast majority of people neveer set it up.

TBH, with a issue such as you say. Then calling bank & speaking to the correct team is the best way to get resolved. Branch staff are at best sales people they have no idea about issues.