The Register Citizen (Torrington, CT)
Legislators troubled by M&T Bank customers’ complaints
Uproar over merger catches attention of state lawmakers
Since the conversion over Labor Day weekend of People’s United Bank accounts to M&T Bank accounts, customers have not hesitated to speak out about the problems they have experienced with the changeover, which is the byproduct of M&T’s $8.3 billion acquisition of People’s earlier this year. Many of the complaints have been directed to the state’s top elected officials, including members of the General Assembly’s Banking Committee. The feedback has troubled those legislators who said that even though they have limited ability to regulate the Buffalo, N.Y.-headquartered M&T that they are determined to find ways to bolster protections for customers of M&T and other banks, which are part of an industry continuously consolidating through mergers and acquisitions.
“I had received assurances from M&T that they were going to have plenty of folks on staff and that this would go smoothly. And it didn’t,” state Rep. Tom Delnicki, R-South Windsor, ranking House member of the Banking Committee, said in an interview this week. “And it doesn’t bode well for any future mergers that occur where you have an out-of-state bank come in and take over another bank that’s here in Connecticut.”
M&T officials said that they are taking customers’ complaints seriously and that they are resolving the problems.
Michael Keegan, M&T’s executive vice president and head of community markets, said in an interview this week that the
“It doesn’t bode well for any future mergers that occur where you have an out-of-state bank come in and take over another bank that’s here in Connecticut.” State Rep. Tom Delnicki, R-South Windsor, ranking House member of the Banking Committee
bank is “in (a) vastly different place than we were a week ago” and that “branches are not as crowded, call center times are returning to premerger levels. We’ve made a massive amount of progress.”
Customers speak out
M&T officials have indicated that they expected some noticeable, but not insurmountable, issues as a result of integrating the People’s systems into M&T’s banking infrastructure.
“We’re in what I would call stabilize mode. When you take a franchise that’s got 700,000 customers, and you change their web banking and you change their mobile access, there’s always change. And it creates challenges for people, and we’re working through those right now,” M&T Chief Financial Officer Darren King said during an investor conference on Sept 14. “Everything we have up and working, there’s no technical issues — it’s just working through that change and getting them up and running.”
Despite the bank’s assurances, many customers have been rattled by the transition. In the past three weeks, M&T’s social media accounts have received several thousand comments about the system changes — with many of them lambasting the bank for their difficulty or inability to access accounts, make bill payments or get timely assistance from customer-service representatives.
The office of Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said it has received more than 100 complaints this month from M&T customers. In response, Tong registered his misgivings in a letter last week to Keegan. Banking Committee members and other legislators have also heard from many upset customers.
“I would say the most alarming aspect of this are those reports that people lost access to their accounts or their account information for a period of time,” state Rep. Jason Doucette, D-Manchester, co-chairman of the banking committee, who is an M&T customer, said in an email. “That is simply unacceptable.”
The troubles with the account conversions have stoked existing concerns among elected officials about the acquisition’s impact on customers and employees. In July 2021, M&T informed the state Department of Labor that it planned to lay off about 750 employees as a result of the acquisition. It has indicated in subsequent statements that fewer employees would end up being laid off, but those statements have not provided any revised numbers for the job cuts.
“I’m interested in having a conversation with M&T and seeing how they’re going to be a corporate partner with all of Connecticut, not just some of Connecticut,” state Sen. Doug McCrory, D-Hartford, a vice chairman of the Banking Committee, said in an interview.
At the same time, many customers appear to have switched their accounts from People’s to M&T with few or no problems. State Sen. Eric Berthel, R-Watertown, the ranking Senate member of the Banking Committee, said in a statement this week that, “my office has not received a single complaint against M&T Bank.”
Berthel acknowledged, however, the disruption reported in other legislators’ districts by adding that, “although this does not undo the inconvenience, sometimes integrations like this unfortunately do not go well despite good planning. As always, my office is a resource for affected consumers, and they can contact me anytime.”
Looking ahead
While they have highlighted their concerns about M&T customers’ travails, Banking Committee members have also noted their regulatory constraints given that the bank operates under a charter granted by New York state.
“I understand the issues the customers are facing, and they need to be addressed. And since the (Connecticut) Department of Banking nor the Banking Committee have jurisdiction over M&T Bank, I appreciate the attorney general for taking on the charge to be the voice for the customers of our state,” state Sen. Patricia Billie Miller, D-Stamford, co-chairwoman of the Banking Committee, said in an email. “I agree with him that there is going to have to be a rebuilding of trust between all parties.”
The Department of Banking, which has received about three-dozen complaints related to the People’s-M&T account conversions, took a similar position.
“The Connecticut Department of Banking are not the regulators of M&T, but have been in contact with senior management to understand the issues and monitor ongoing progress of the merger,” Matthew Smith, a Banking Department spokesman, said in a statement.
Despite the state’s lack of regulatory power over M&T, Delnicki suggests that a public hearing be held to examine the issues “surrounding the M&T conversion and the problems that occurred.”
Delnicki said that such a hearing would also be useful given the ongoing consolidation in the banking industry. Between 2001 and 2020, there were 77 mergers and acquisitions involving Connecticut-based banks, according to the Department of Banking’s website.
“We need to get all the information and we need to have the lessons learned, so that in the future, when there’s a merger of this magnitude, we don’t have the problems we’ve had here,” Delnicki said.
At the same time, the banking industry’s consolidation has provided some Banking Committee members further motivation to pursue measures that would strengthen smaller banking institutions.
“As mergers continue to happen and banks get bigger, I would say that as a policy we should be incentivizing the success of our smaller state-chartered community banks and credit unions where Connecticut residents can hopefully get better customer service and where the institution is directly accountable to regulators here in Connecticut,” Doucette said.