2 in 3 banks are axed

Customers hit by ‘staggering’ loss of branches as MSPs urge BoS to rethink

TWO-THIRDS of Britain’s bank branches have closed their doors in the past 30 years, leaving millions of customers stranded.

The closures across the country mean that a fifth of households are now more than two miles from their nearest branch, according to a study by the Which? consumer group.

Almost 10 per cent of people have to travel more than three miles and 6 per cent are more than four miles from a bank.

Sparsely-populated parts of Scotland have been hit hardest by closures, accounting for the top 70 communities farthest from a bank.

Simon Clarke, a Tory member of the Treasury Select Committee, which recently launched an investigation into the diminishing accessibility of financial services, said: ‘Banks are depriving people of essential services.

‘With no bank manager on hand vulnerable people are left without any guidance on financial matters. Offering online banking is no good for those who don’t have access.’

According to parliamentary records, there were 20,583 branches in 1988, but the consumer group’s analysis shows there are only 7,586 today.

Areas where recent bank closures have led to towns or villages without a single branch also include Lossiemouth in Moray, Kirriemuir in Angus and Stonehouse in Lanarkshire.

Residents of the three towns learned they would be left without branches from next year after the Bank of Scotland announced a fresh wave of closures.

On Wednesday, the bank said it would close eight branches by the end of next year, blaming falling customer numbers.

It will also close branches in Glasgow, Paisley in Renfrewshire, Dundee, Burnside in Rutherglen, Lanarkshire, and Keith in Moray between February and June next year. Nationalist MSPs have written to Bank of Scotland’s managing director, Robin Bulloch, calling for an urgent rethink of the plans.

Glasgow MSP Sandra White said: ‘It’s outrageous that banking officials believe they can up sticks and

‘Outrageous leaving communities behind’

leave behind the communities they are supposed to serve so callously.

‘A face-to-face banking service is indispensable for many of our constituents. The threat of closure to eight branches across the country will come as a shock to many but we are determined to fight to keep every one of them open.’

Ceri Stanaway of Which? said: ‘The true scale of bank branch closures is staggering – and has left millions of people struggling to access the vital financial services.’

‘For many there is simply no substitute for a dedicated branch and the wide range of services it offers and many customers now face having to travel long distances if they are to avoid financial exclusion.’

BACK in the mid-1930s, Sylvia De Luca got a job working behind the counter of Tarry’s fish shop in Edinburgh’s Haymarket. She was just 14 and learning the rudiments of customer relations the best way possible: by dealing with them face to face.

She spent the next 70 years serving members of the public from behind the counter of various family businesses. I imagine that during that time she developed instincts for customer expectations as keen as anyone in her native city.

These numbers put Mrs De Luca at 84 when she finally retired and this was 13 years ago. That means the proud lady with the walking stick getting on a bus from Juniper Green to Edinburgh city centre to visit the bank because they had closed down her local branch is 97.

It would be heartening to report that, on arrival at RBS on Princes Street, a smart young employee immediately clocked the elderly patron, introduced him or herself and dedicated the next few minutes to ensuring her business was expedited as smoothly as possible.

After all, mature visitors to banks are often among their most loyal customers. Mrs De Luca, who started banking with RBS in the 1950s, is a good example.

Mature visitors may have health issues or anxieties which develop with age. Mrs De Luca suffers from Raynaud’s disease, which limits the movement in her fingers, and technology which she does not understand makes her anxious.

So what do you suppose did happen when the 97-year-old took the trouble to visit the nearest branch to her home now that the one she used to go to has been deleted from her community? She was told counter service was not available to her and that if she wanted to withdraw money, she should go outside and use the ATM.

‘What have they got a counter for then?’ asks the bewildered customer.

THAT is an excellent question which, I have little doubt, will precipitate the disappearance of counters, not the arrival of people with a clue what they are doing behind them.

Mrs De Luca admits that she knows ‘nothing about technology’ and would not have felt confident using the cash machine. ‘She could have helped me,’ she says of the uncooperative teller. ‘I’m 97!’

I am no technology expert either but I have come to understand the futility of punching the same information into a computer and expecting a different response.

If the computer says all customers must use the ATM outside rather than counter service to withdraw cash, there really is no sense in appealing to its better nature.

This is one of the reasons many of us are hesitant about having computers run too much of our lives. They adapt poorly to extenuating circumstances. They do not do well at stepping back and seeing the bigger picture.

Mrs De Luca’s unfortunate encounter with her bank demonstrates that it is much more in thrall to technology than some of its customers. It illustrates something else too.

Even where customers do succeed in gaining an audience with human employees, these staff members increasingly behave like the computers which will surely soon replace them. They are dead-eyed, detached and capable of applying only commands – never common sense – to customer service situations.

It is not just banks. The pattern is repeated practically everywhere large organisations deal with customers – or interface with them, as techy terminology prefers – and this vexed business is rarely conducted over something as archaic as a counter.

You think your call centre telephonist sounds repetitive in conveying the message that your protests are futile and the thing complained about is not going to change.

IT is because a computer is feeding him his lines. It is not his job to deviate from them, only to deliver them as a humanoid might. I do not recommend Mrs De Luca tries one of these calls at home. Nor do I see mileage in taking her business elsewhere.

When I tried to make an appointment to see someone at a rival bank to open a new account I was told it would take three weeks for a face-toface meeting. But, if I preferred, I could take their humanoids out of the equation and discuss my new account with a computer instead. Naturally, the machine could interface with me immediately.

It is the same idea when you are buying food at Marks & Spencer. In a hurry? Then use one of our Card Only machines. Do the job we used to pay people to do for you before we realised you would do it for us for free and our staff wage bill could be trimmed.

Alternatively, join the queue to be served by one of our two remaining till operators.

Most galling of all, perhaps, is the fiction the terminal decline in service was somehow the customer’s idea.

The reason for the wave of local branch closures, both RBS and Bank of Scotland tell us, is customers tend to use digital banking now rather than visit their branches.

The reality is customers are cajoled at every turn to ‘go digital’ to allow organisations such as these to cut costs and maximise profits.

And the alienation of the oldest, most loyal ones like Mrs De Luca is mere collateral damage.