| | | 
	
		| Banking the unbanked - a snapshot
 November 2005
 |  
		| Banking the unbanked - a snapshot; Toynbee Hall SAFE, November 2005 |  
		| 1 Contents List of figures 3
 Acknowledgments 5
 Foreword 7
 Summary of recommendations 9
 Preface 11
 1. Introduction 13
 2. Methodology 17
 3. About the people 24
 4. The Informed Choice Discussion 26
 5. Marketing 30
 6. About the product 33
 7. Application process 36
 Visiting financial institutions
 Implementing identification and address verification guidelines
 8. Accounts opened 48
 9. Possible next steps and conclusion 52
 Appendix A
 Project Worker Survey 55
 2
 3
 List of Figures
 Fig 1: Flow chart describing interaction with client and points 17
 of data collection
 Fig 2: Account ownership at first contact meeting 24
 Fig 3: Age of clients 25
 Fig 4: Clients by type of benefit received 25
 Fig 5: Stated preference for Direct Payment 27
 Fig 6: Stated preference for Direct Payment by age 27
 Fig 7: Stated preference for Direct Payment by benefit received 28
 Fig 8: Rating of different banks’ marketing materials 31
 Fig 9: Basic bank account product features 34
 Fig 10: Amalgamated ratings across all banks, all visits and 40
 all purposes
 Fig 11: Ratings for those visits where the purpose of the visit was 40
 to open an account
 Fig 12: Ratings for the occasions on which the purpose of account 41
 opening was realised and an account was opened
 successfully
 Fig 13: Ratings for the occasions on which no decision on the 41
 application was reached, and a decision was still pending
 Fig 14: Ratings for the occasions on which the application was 41
 declined
 Fig 15: Stated barrier to not previously opening an account for 44
 Direct Payment
 Fig 16: Ratings for those visits where the purpose of the visit was to 45
 open an account (as opposed to information gathering or
 account follow-up)
 Fig 17: Ratings for the occasions on which the purpose of account 45
 opening was realised and an account was opened
 successfully
 4
 Fig 18: Ratings for the occasions on which no decision on the 45
 application was reached, and a decision was still pending
 Fig 19: Ratings for the occasions on which the application was 45
 declined
 Fig 20: Ratings comparing the utilisation of the lists by staff, 46
 compared with the outcome of the account application
 being opened
 Fig 21: Stated preference for Direct Payment shown by overall 49
 figures and by 1035 cases where SAFE knows an
 account for Direct Payment was opened
 Fig 22: Accounts opened for Direct Payment 49
 Fig 23: Accounts opened by brand where known 50
 5
 Banking the unbanked - a snapshot
 By Adam Clark and Alexandra Forter, with Faith Reynolds
 A snapshot on the institutional barriers to banking for people experiencing
 financial exclusion by SAFE, part of Toynbee Hall
 Acknowledgements
 This snapshot is an additional outcome of the Access Project. The authors
 would like to thank SAFE Project Workers Alex Laver, Ana Miah, Ella Titman,
 Lucy Thomson, Mark Allan, Milla Gregor, Nevres Niyazi, Naomi James, Ola
 Aishida and Peter Hamerton.
 The authors would also like to extend their thanks to their Toynbee Hall
 colleagues, Alice Brennan, Alice Rogers, Ian McGimpsey and Luke
 Geoghegan, as well as Andy Chaplin and Gail Biggerstaff at change, and Nick
 Jepps at Impact Housing.
 November 2005
 6
 7
 Foreword
 “The Government recognises that financial exclusion imposes real costs on
 those who can least afford them and is committed to working to address this
 problem. Access to banking is key to promoting financial inclusion as it
 enables families to benefit from the savings associated with being able to
 cash a cheque for free and with being able to pay bills by direct debit. A bank
 account can also act as a key to further engagement with financial services.
 In recognition of this the Government and the banks have agreed to work
 together to halve the number of adults in households with no access to a bank
 account and to have made significant progress in two years. The work of
 organisations like SAFE is important in improving access to banking amongst
 individuals who face particular hurdles. I have taken a particular interest in
 the work SAFE has done in parts of London where financial exclusion
 presents a real challenge and the problems faced are very acute. Lessons
 learned by SAFE in undertaking this work represent a valuable practical
 contribution to tackling financial exclusion.”
 Ivan Lewis MP
 8
 9
 Summary of recommendations
 Free, independent and accessible services, such as those provided
 by SAFE, should be more widely established to facilitate access to
 banking for vulnerable consumers or people on low incomes.
 A certification for marketing material should be created by an
 independent regulator.
 Research should be undertaken to consider ways in which innovation
 in product design can facilitate financial inclusion, serve client needs
 and remain commercially viable.
 The basic bank account product should be designed with the needs
 of the target group at its core to prevent discrimination and
 ‘exclusion within inclusion’.
 The financial services industry, Government and others should invest
 in support for newly banked people.
 To increase the likelihood of full and consistent compliance with the
 Banking Code the Banking Code Standards Board should publish the
 findings of its mystery shopping exercises.
 The financial services industry should empower its customers to
 enable them to know when banks’ behaviour is unacceptable and to
 be able to challenge this when it happens.
 The financial services industry should take full responsibility for
 enabling and incentivising its staff to sell its products and provide a
 good level of service to all, no matter what their background.
 Clear, transparent and comprehensive guidelines on acceptable
 documentation for account opening purposes should be published in
 each branch and made available to customers.
 All frontline branch staff should receive regular comprehensive
 training on procedures for account opening and how these can be
 adapted for people without traditional documentation for
 identification verification.
 Applications for basic bank accounts should always allow at least the
 option for identification verification at branch level but preferably full
 account opening at branch level.
 The British Bankers’ Association Financial Inclusion Advisory Panel
 should undertake to produce and publish guidelines for branch staff
 on how people experiencing financial exclusion can best be served in
 relation to account opening.
 10
 11
 Preface
 Most of society takes for granted the existence of 'tools' for managing, saving
 and investing money. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine what our financial
 strategies would be like if there were no bank accounts, pension plans or
 insurance cover available. But this is the reality today in the UK for many
 people who cannot gain access to even the most basic products. For others,
 previous negative experiences and/or lack of financial literacy effectively
 exclude them. The financial services 'revolution' has passed them by. Coming
 on top of existing deprivation and disadvantage, financial exclusion can be the
 difference between a household staying in control or spiralling into decline.
 Even for those families and individuals who are coping at the moment, it may
 take very little for that situation to deteriorate.
 SAFE (Services Against Financial Exclusion), part of Toynbee Hall, promotes
 financial inclusion among disadvantaged groups of people by working to
 increase financial capability and access to financial products. SAFE carries
 Toynbee Hall’s strapline at its heart – learning from local action, developing
 national solutions.
 Since 2002 SAFE has developed a range of practical services primarily
 serving the local community of Tower Hamlets, but now more widely serving
 London. Alongside its practical work SAFE has always sought to use its own
 experience to benefit that of others working in the field, either informally
 through meeting and sharing best practice with others or more formally
 through developing resources like the Personal Finance Handbook,
 developed in partnership with Child Poverty Action Group. Most recently
 SAFE launched FIF, the national Financial Inclusion Forum. FIF provides a
 space for organisations, associations, policy makers, financial institutions and
 funders across the UK to come together, share ideas and build a network to
 increase the awareness of the crucial role financial inclusion plays in wider
 social inclusion.
 It is in this vein of sharing its experience that SAFE presents this snapshot
 detailing its experience of working among especially vulnerable groups of
 people to help them access mainstream banking services for everyday money
 management. This report was an additional outcome of a project whose
 primary aim was to help people transition to Direct Payment. SAFE Project
 Workers worked at a grass roots level with customers and financial institutions
 on a daily basis but have always remained aware of how their local work fitted
 into the ‘bigger picture’ of promoting financial inclusion at a national level. It is
 due to the additional effort and committed nature of SAFE Project Workers
 that SAFE can share its findings and ultimately hope to increase financial
 inclusion.
 It is hoped that this snapshot will provide a useful insight into the reality of
 accessing mainstream financial services for people on low incomes and spur
 on industry, Government and the voluntary sector to pursue true financial
 inclusion for the benefit of all society.
 12
 13
 Introduction
 This report provides a snapshot of how people experiencing financial
 exclusion are accessing financial services and how the industry is facilitating
 that. The data is based on:
 · a database of 2400 client records;
 · 83 surveys completed by SAFE project workers during April – June
 2005 recording their experiences of single interactions with bank
 branches; and,
 · a focus group made up of SAFE Project Workers.
 The work is focused on institutional barriers rather than the basic bank
 account product itself. (Recommendations on product development have
 been made by the National Consumer Council and SAFE endorses the nature
 of this work.)
 The focus of SAFE’s work was to deliver a service to its clients and not to
 undertake research which could be rigorously analysed. However, it is hoped
 that this report which details and gives some evidence to SAFE’s experiences
 of working with hard to reach groups will inform the debate on access to
 banking for low income groups of people and provide constructive feedback to
 the financial services industry on areas where they can improve their service.
 Financial exclusion
 Financial exclusion can be described as the circumstances in which a person
 does not have access to appropriate financial products or services which give
 them the opportunity, ability and confidence to make informed decisions about
 their financial situation or organise their money effectively1.
 Experience of financial exclusion is concentrated among people on low
 incomes living in disadvantaged areas2. Product holding alone does not imply
 full financial inclusion. For instance, simply owning a basic bank account
 does not imply that a customer has left the cash economy as they may just
 empty the account as soon as they receive their benefits or wages. However,
 account holding is widely recognised as a common indicator of the degree of
 financial inclusion across a society. Indeed, the government and financial
 institutions have established this measurement as their goal: to halve the
 number of adults in households without a bank account, and of having made
 significant progress in that direction within two years3.
 In the United Kingdom, most recent statistics available demonstrate that bank
 accounts are not equitably distributed among the population. The 2002/2003
 Family Resources Survey4 shows that 1.9 million households are without any
 1 Beyond Bank Accounts, IPPR/CAB, 2003
 2 See In or Out, FSA, July 2000 for more information about financial exclusion and who it effects
 3 Stated Terms of Reference for the Financial Inclusion Taskforce: visit www.financialinclusiontaskforce.
 org.uk
 4 Given the Government’s recent drive to increase transition to Direct Payment the number of people
 with bank accounts is likely to have risen. However, more recent data is not yet available to give us a
 clear indication of how the take-up of bank accounts has changed over the last two years
 14
 kind of account. This equates to 8% of the total population but, among those
 households in the bottom three income deciles, this percentage rises to 65%5.
 For those without transactional accounts:
 · Money management is more expensive. For instance, without an
 account it is not possible to take advantage of direct debits which offer
 discounts on bills and cheques may have to be cashed at significant
 cost.
 · Entrance into employment is more difficult because increasingly
 employers wish to pay wages directly into an account.
 · Opportunities to secure and save money are few. Saving cash in a
 jam jar or under the bed leaves individuals vulnerable to theft.
 · Opportunities to borrow are limited. Bank accounts often act as a
 gateway to other financial products. Without a bank account
 individuals are forced to rely on alternative, sometimes illegal, and
 usually expensive forms of credit.
 Policies and products
 Financial services are becoming increasingly sophisticated as technological
 advances make allowances for increased cost and time efficiencies and thus
 increased competition among financial services providers. Alongside market
 forces Government itself also has a vested interest in seeing people take
 greater personal responsibility for their financial future as it too can make
 savings in the way it administers and funds the welfare benefits system. For
 example, the state pension will become ever more costly with an ever
 increasing elderly population. Encouraging people to save for their own long
 term security relieves some of the cost burden and encourages personal
 financial responsibility. Government also has goals to reduce social exclusion
 and poverty. In 1999 Policy Action Team 14 published their report Access to
 Financial Services. This showed how financial exclusion effected people on
 low incomes and how better access to more appropriate financial products
 could increase social inclusion.
 Since PAT 14 and the recognition of wider economic interests the financial
 inclusion agenda has seen increasing momentum. Government policies have
 obliged the financial services industry to respond by providing simplified
 products to meet the perceived target groups’ needs. The development of
 Individual Savings Accounts, Stakeholder pensions, the Child Trust Fund and
 the Basic Bank Account (and associated Post Office card account) have all
 been paid for largely by the financial services industry. The extent to which
 Government has achieved its aims through these products varies, as does the
 extent to which the financial services industry has backed the policies which
 underlie their own product development.
 Direct Payment
 A case in point is the automated transfer of welfare benefits, known as Direct
 Payment. The original concept was to allow people a no-frills banking service
 5 Family Resources Survey, 2002/2003
 15
 through the Post Office. Known as the Universal Banking initiative, it was
 largely driven by the fact that automated transfer of benefits would reduce the
 costs of administration and the level of fraud, while at the same time revitalise
 the Post Office and increase financial inclusion. The costs proved too high for
 both Government and the financial services industry who compromised on the
 development of Post Office card accounts and basic bank accounts.
 The Post Office card account works effectively like an electronic benefits
 book: people may withdraw their benefits from the account, a little at a time if
 they choose, but no money can be deposited and there are no transactional
 facilities. Basic bank accounts were developed so that people could access
 their benefits through the Post Office6 and have access to basic transactional
 banking facilities. As well as investing in the development of its own products,
 at the Government’s suggestion, the financial services industry also paid
 £180million over five years towards the Post Office card account.
 However, despite banks and building societies investing in their basic banking
 products specifically for this market there is no great appetite to sell the
 product. This is largely because the product itself and the low-income target
 group are not considered particularly profitable. The consequence of this is
 that people get caught between a policy requiring them to open an account to
 make a transition to Direct Payment on the one hand, and the high street
 bank branch whose aims do not traditionally include serving less profitable
 groups of people. At the sharp end, this means people experiencing
 financially exclusion are still not always able to access bank accounts.
 Bridging the gap
 SAFE, part of Toynbee Hall, aims to act as a bridge between Government and
 industry, by providing support and advice to individuals, to help them
 understand the options available to them and to help them action their choice.
 To this end, SAFE has worked over the last three years to help people access
 appropriate accounts for everyday money management and it continues to do
 this work. However, between October 2004 and August 2005 SAFE
 expanded this service pan-London to support the Department for Work and
 Pensions in its drive to increase the take-up of Direct Payment within some of
 the most vulnerable and hardest to reach groups.
 During the course of SAFE’s work it undertook informed choice discussions
 with people on very low incomes from typically hard-to-reach groups to help
 them understand Direct Payment and the options for receiving their benefits
 (including opening a Post Office card account or a current or basic bank
 account). Appropriate to their decision, SAFE discussed different types of
 basic bank accounts available using comparative information, encouraging
 the individual to make their own informed decision. SAFE then helped its
 clients to access an account by helping them prepare their identification, fill
 out application forms and accompany clients to banks as appropriate. SAFE
 continued to offer follow-up support to the client to ensure an account was
 6 All basic bank accounts have this feature. However, some have been developed to allow their
 customers the possibility of depositing money through the Post Office into a known bank account as
 well
 16
 opened and the client was happy in using the account. SAFE provided
 additional financial capability training as appropriate.
 Alongside the practical service SAFE provided to clients it also provided
 training on this particular area of work and broader financial inclusion
 messages to over 150 partner organisations across London. It provided
 additional resources including a guide to opening accounts for people on low
 incomes and a guide on how to obtain sources of identification and address
 verification.
 17
 Methodology
 Fig. 1: Flow chart describing interaction with client and points of data
 collection
 The data for this snapshot was taken from the main management information
 system of SAFE’s Access Project, with some additional input from its project
 workers in the form of surveys and focus groups. This section deals with the
 methodology for data collection and processing specific to each chapter. First,
 some general points.
 Informed Choice
 Discussion with client
 Client details recorded
 Client selects option for
 Direct Payment
 Client carries forward
 choice without support
 Further support to get an
 appropriate product
 Direct payment
 inappropriate for client
 SAFE records more data
 on client needs
 Client selects preferred
 product with information and
 support from SAFE
 Client gets account and
 Direct Payment starts
 SAFE accompanies client
 to bank
 Possible survey of
 experience completed
 SAFE attempts follow up SAFE provides support
 around alternatives
 SAFE worker records
 outcome
 SAFE worker records &
 shares experience
 18
 Overall 2437 people were seen by the project. However, their situations
 varied, needs and choices with regards financial products varied, and
 consequently SAFE’s interactions with them did too. Notably, while all clients
 engaged in an Informed Choice Discussion, or ICD, (see section below), there
 was only concrete information about the transition to Direct Payment in
 around 1000 cases. Of those, information about the specific account that they
 chose is limited to around 800 accounts.
 Data was collected with the needs of these clients and the targets of the
 project uppermost in mind. It was not usually collected for research purposes.
 So, while collection procedures were clearly explained to all data collectors
 and reviewed for consistency and reliability there is introduced some bias and
 inconsistency into recording data.
 One example of this is that more information was gained where more support
 was required by a client. So the data and surveys tend to reflect the needs of
 the most vulnerable groups of people SAFE works with, and are not as
 focussed on the experience of financially excluded groups with lower support
 needs. That said, when looking at issues like experience of service in bank
 branches, it should also been taken into account that an experienced advisor
 from SAFE with high levels of knowledge about products and account opening
 procedure was present.
 Due to the client focus of SAFE’s work, the number of surveys is skewed to
 the bank branches where clients wanted to open accounts or felt they would
 be more likely to succeed in account opening. SAFE Project Workers filled
 out 83 surveys on branch visits covering 10 bank brands over a six month
 period between March and August 2005. However, a consistent amount of
 data is not available across all bank brands and as such SAFE can only
 provide generic information regarding bank performance in this report.
 Nor is it possible to understand how geographic proximity of different
 branches interacted with account opening. We simply cannot tell if, for
 instance, a customer opened an account with one bank rather than another
 purely because another bank branch was not available in their location.
 Where data recorded is about products or institutions providing products, the
 work covers those institutions providing basic product to a lowincome/
 financially excluded market. This information was largely recorded by
 surveying project workers.
 This is a genuine snapshot, and as such is unable to take account of
 potentially important changes that took place during the period of data
 collection. For example, there is no attempt to make comparisons pre and
 post changes to the Banking Code, or to take account of changes a bank has
 made to its product or internal processes.
 Informed Choice Discussions (ICD)
 The ICD tended to act as a first point of contact for the client. At the end of
 the initial meeting a client’s personal details pertinent to the project’s
 objectives (rather than research objectives) were recorded on a management
 information system.
 19
 The data regarding ICDs is derived from the main database of SAFE’s Access
 Project. Where available this recorded the information gathered by project
 workers at the time of first contact, and is based on self-reporting and project
 worker assessment. The focus of data collection was to ensure that clients
 were able and supported to exercise a suitable option for Direct Payment.
 This means that the data and bases used are not always consistent and that
 there are some anomalies in the figures. However, the data collected does
 provide broad overviews of the client base, their attitudes and preferences for
 Direct Payment and banking options.
 Application process
 Project workers completed a feedback form7 after each visit to a local branch.
 All ten project workers completed forms documenting their experience with
 branches. Project workers were asked to evaluate each visit separately and
 rank their experience in terms of quality of service in several categories. This
 covered the behaviour of the staff and the procedures that were encountered,
 including requirements around identification and address verification
 documentation.
 It is worth mentioning again that the number of surveys is skewed to the bank
 branches where clients wanted to open accounts or felt they would be more
 likely to succeed in account opening.
 Knowledge reflects the possession of knowledge by staff, the
 comprehensiveness of this as provided to them, and thence on to prospective
 and actual clients. This extends to products and procedures, but also the
 needs of clients. SAFE surveyed on specific areas of knowledge such as the
 provision of identification and address verification documentation, account
 opening procedures and likely outcomes.
 Communication concerns all of the ways that the banks have of interacting
 with clients, from marketing materials, telephone and internet provision, and
 branch staff’s behaviour. In this rating SAFE considered how well information
 was communicated to customers and project workers, concerning bank
 account options and features, as well as the processes involved in opening
 accounts. This also factors in ‘softer’ considerations about the way that staff
 engage with the clients and supplements the analysis of the marketing
 materials found earlier in this report.
 Flexibility measures the adaptability of the banks, and the ability to take
 account of the widely differing circumstances of customers, rather than
 insisting on a strict adherence to inflexible procedures. Clearly this is
 constrained by procedures, but it measures the efficacy of implementation of
 procedures that do exist, taking into account the needs of the individual.
 Procedures is an assessment of the officially designed processes that banks
 have that facilitate account opening, covering the elements of whether the
 application materials are available, whether a suitable account is actually
 7 Please see Appendix A
 20
 made available, and whether credit scoring is factored into decisions for basic
 bank account applicants8.
 These different elements are derived from the factors measured in the
 surveys by project workers. A copy of the survey can be found in Appendix 1.
 In addition to these factors, data was gathered on the basic details (time,
 location, staff involved and duration) of the visit, the purpose of the visit, and
 the outcome. This allows for some tentative conclusions about the interaction
 of these variables with the key parameters for financial inclusion achievement
 (for instance, is account opening more likely during quiet times within a
 branch?). However, this type of information is clearly limited by the size of the
 samples and the other limitations of the exercise.
 Identification/address verification
 This information is again derived from the main project database, and the
 work of the project workers in facilitating access to Direct Payment. It needs to
 be borne in mind that obtaining information from individuals, as a result of the
 type of groups SAFE was engaging with, was on occasions impossible. This
 means that the information on accounts that SAFE does have is unlikely to be
 either from the most excluded or the least. The former often do not engage
 with ongoing support which prohibits our finding out what (if anything) they
 have achieved, while the latter are least likely to require ongoing support.
 The main information gathered included the type of account used for Direct
 Payment, and is limited to where an account was made available for this
 purpose where it had not previously been. Mostly this means opening a new
 account, but in some cases (less than 50) this would mean facilitating access
 to an existing account, through reactivating a dormant account or tackling
 issues such as debt or loss of access. Anecdotal information about the types
 of intervention required (such as helping a client to apply for a passport, or
 ensuring that the client’s concerns about charges on the account and
 consequent debt were addressed) to achieve account opening in these cases
 was captured, however it cannot be easily amalgamated for analytical use.
 Marketing materials
 This analysis was limited to basic bank account publications and application
 forms and it was therefore assumed that the target market was the unbanked
 or those with limited financial products. Analysis was also considered in the
 light of the Banking Code of March 2005 key commitment:
 · We will make sure that our advertising and promotional literature is
 clear and not misleading and that you are given clear information about
 our products and services.
 and also the specific guidance that:
 8 Whilst basic bank accounts should not include a traditional ‘credit score’ many banks are obliged to
 run checks to ensure that their prospective customers are not bankrupts or holding unresolved debts
 (according to terms on different accounts). However, anecdotally SAFE found on some occasions staff
 in certain banks would consistently put basic bank account applications through as current account
 applications, thus attracting credit scores.
 21
 · We will make sure that all advertising and promotional material is clear,
 fair, reasonable and not misleading.
 Marketing materials and application forms for basic bank accounts were
 collected from 8 banks and 1 building society during the first half of 2005. The
 institutions’ literature, meaning leaflet and application form if separate, was
 assessed by a team of six project workers. The process was informed by the
 experience of the SAFE Project Workers who used the materials on a regular
 basis with people from the target group.
 Ratings of 0 (poor) to 2 (good) were given to each brand for their materials on
 the basic bank account. A focus group was then held to discuss individual
 assessments and determine an average rating for each brand’s materials.
 The areas considered were as follows:
 Format of Material
 The general format of the various materials was considered, whether it was a
 brochure, a flyer, an A4 booklet etc, measuring how effectively this worked for
 financially excluded clients. This extended to an analysis of the layout of the
 publications, how easily navigated they were, whether sections were clearly
 delineated, and whether they cross-referenced to other publications.
 Higher marks were awarded for: Lower marks resulted from:
 · Dedicated basic bank account
 literature
 · Basic banking information
 being difficult to locate within
 other literature
 · Clearly signposted sections · Multiple cross-references to
 other sources of information
 · Good legibility · Dense or difficult to read text
 · Clear fonts · User-unfriendly formats
 · Materials which indicated a
 positive approach to the client
 group
 · Materials which marginalised or
 stigmatised the client group
 · Inclusion of irrelevant
 information such as information
 about other products
 Writing Style
 There was an analysis of the writing style within the various documents. It
 covered the language used in terms of vocabulary, syntax and jargon. It also
 covered the style of the text. As financial exclusion intersects with such
 issues as basic skills and English as a second language there is an
 22
 importance in ensuring that materials are easily understood and facilitate
 access.
 Higher marks were awarded for: Lower marks resulted from:
 · Simple communication of key
 messages
 · Complicated sentence
 structures
 · Easily understood words · Proliferation of jargon or
 complex terms
 · An overly formal writing style
 which reinforces negative
 perceptions of banking
 Basic Bank Account Features
 The specific way in which features of the basic bank accounts were presented
 in the documents was considered. It is important that full information is
 provided in a clear way so that customers are able to obtain crucial
 information about what an account in question does, and equally importantly,
 does not do.
 Lower marks were awarded where information was incomplete, avoided
 mentioning restrictions on the account, or assumed more knowledge than is
 likely amongst unbanked people.
 Disclosure of key terms and conditions
 Terms and conditions contain a lot of information of a technical nature, and
 therefore there is only a certain amount that can be done to make this
 accessible to everyone. However, this challenge can be overcome by well
 thought-out literature, which promotes accessibility rather than confusion and
 barriers to entry.
 Higher marks were awarded for: Lower marks resulted from:
 · Good accessibility · Excessive use of jargon
 · Good legibility · Use of ‘small print’
 · Comprehensiveness · Missing or impartial information
 Contact Information
 Availability of contact information is particularly important as customers may
 wish to inform their decision by asking questions about the product. Clients
 new to financial services are often more likely to have questions and need
 additional support in opening an account. Vulnerable consumers or those
 with disabilities need to have different options available to them when
 23
 contacting the branch which are appropriate to their needs (for instance,
 internet and phone access when a customer has limited opportunity to leave
 the house).
 Higher marks were awarded for: Lower marks resulted from:
 · Obvious and easily located
 contact details
 · No contact details
 · Provision of variety of contact
 methods
 · Address only
 · Provision made for people with
 different needs (e.g. Braille)
 · No provision for people with
 different needs
 · Freephone numbers and
 detachable cards
 · Premium rate telephone
 number only
 Overall accessibility for clients
 The mark for overall accessibility reflects all of the other categories listed
 above. It is intended to give an overall suggestion of how the various
 published literature either facilitates or hinders access to basic banking
 facilities amongst people who are traditionally ‘financially excluded’.
 24
 About the people
 Whilst SAFE has helped people open bank accounts over the last three years
 and continues to do so, this specific report is based on data collected over 9
 months during the course of a project helping people transition to Direct
 Payment. 2437 people were seen.
 SAFE worked primarily with particularly hard-to-reach and vulnerable groups
 of people, for instance, people experiencing homelessness or in temporary
 accommodation, refugees, offenders and ex-offenders, those with substance
 mis-use or mental health issues and the long-term unemployed, among
 others. Clients came into contact with the service through SAFE’s presence
 in job centres and community centres as well as through referrals from
 community, housing or other organisations. SAFE worked with over 150
 organisations in the course of its outreach.
 The following graphs provide details of the group of people SAFE worked
 with.
 Fig 2: Account ownership at first contact meeting
 Percent
 Base: 2437 cases
 60% of clients did not have an account of any kind when they first met with
 SAFE. 17.2% already had a Post Office card account and 0.2% had dormant
 accounts.
 0
 10
 20
 30
 40
 50
 60
 70
 80
 90
 100
 Overall
 Dormant account
 CU account
 Basic bank account
 Current account
 No response
 Poca
 No account
 25
 Fig 3: Age of clients
 Percent
 Base: 2437 cases
 Where age is known the majority of SAFE’s clients were between the age of
 21 and 50.
 Fig 4: Clients by type of benefit received
 Percent
 Base: 2437 cases
 71% of SAFE’s clients were on Job Seekers Allowance.
 Whilst SAFE recognises that not everybody on Job Seekers Allowance is
 actively seeking work, the fact that 71% of clients were on the benefit
 suggests that it would be to their advantage to have access to transactional
 banking facilities, since an increased number of mainstream employers state
 this as a prerequisite for being given a job.
 0
 10
 20
 30
 40
 50
 60
 70
 80
 90
 100
 Overall
 No benefit
 Pension
 Other benefits
 JSA
 0
 10
 20
 30
 40
 50
 60
 70
 80
 90
 100
 Overall
 Over 65
 51-65
 41-50
 31-40
 21-30
 20 and under
 Not known
 26
 The Informed Choice Discussion
 Introduction
 In helping people access financial services SAFE believes in the importance
 of empowering the individual to make their own informed decision. To this
 end SAFE provides independent information and a discussion framework to
 inform its clients’ understanding of the different variables involved in the
 decision and to help them understand what choices they have.
 In the case of helping people open basic bank accounts, SAFE provided oneto-
 one impartial information about Direct Payment, the options available for
 receiving benefits directly and what processes were involved in each option.
 Where clients wanted to open a basic bank account, SAFE project workers
 used comparative tables to explain the different features and terms and
 conditions of accounts. Clients were then encouraged to make their own
 decision based on preferred features as well as personal circumstances (for
 instance, geographic proximity to the bank). Once clients had made a
 decision SAFE helped them to gather further information about their chosen
 account, as well as start the application process.
 Recommendations
 Free, independent and accessible services, such as those provided
 by SAFE, should be more widely established to facilitate access to
 banking for vulnerable consumers or people on low incomes. The
 provision of these services should be evaluated over the long term to gain
 an understanding of what the impact is on longer term account holding and
 financial capability.
 27
 Data
 The following graphs show clients’ stated preferences for account opening.
 The preference may have been recorded at any time during the informed
 choice discussion. Available data does not show a ‘before and after’
 discussion preference.
 Fig 5: Stated preference for Direct Payment
 Percent
 Base: 2437 cases where an account has been opened
 Overall preference among the group SAFE served was for a bank or credit
 union account (53%). Of the total 45% wanted to open a new bank or credit
 union account and 8% wanted to use an existing bank account. However
 32% stated the POca as their first preference, with 26% wishing to open a
 new POca.
 Fig 6: Stated preference for Direct Payment by age
 Percent
 Base: 2437 cases: 914 age not known, 215 20 and under, 497 21-30 years, 399 31-40 years,
 254 41-50 years, 121 51-65 years, 37 over 65
 Preference for a basic bank or credit union account for Direct Payment was
 most prevalent in people up to 30 years of age.
 0
 10
 20
 30
 40
 50
 60
 70
 80
 90
 100
 Overall Under 20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-65 Over 65 Age
 unknown
 Order book to new Bank or CU account Order book to new POCA
 Order book to existing Bank or CU account Existing Poca to Bank/CU acc
 Order book to existing POCA Other
 0
 10
 20
 30
 40
 50
 60
 70
 80
 90
 100
 Overall
 Other
 Existing Poca to bank or CU
 account
 Order book to existing bank
 or CU account
 Order book to new Poca
 Order book to new bank or
 CU account
 28
 Fig 7: Stated preference for Direct Payment by benefit received
 Percent
 Base: 2437 cases: 1730 on JSA, 585 on other benefits, 73 on pension, 49 not on benefit (not
 shown here)
 Stated preference for a basic bank or credit union account was most strong
 among those on Job Seekers Allowance.
 Key findings and wider interpretation of data
 · The majority of clients did not have access to transactional banking
 facilities before contact with SAFE
 · There was an overall preference for a bank account over POca stated
 during the course of the informed choice discussion
 · Most resistance to opening new accounts of any kind was displayed by
 people over 65 years of age, but existing account holding in that group
 was also more likely
 · 52% were given assistance in opening an appropriate account, with a
 further 13% given support in requesting an invitation letter for a POca9
 Direct Payment and the options available for transitioning to it are various.
 The products for receiving Direct Payment are also numerous. For instance,
 the Post Office card account does not allow for wages to be credited to the
 account whilst bank accounts do. However, whilst all basic bank accounts
 allow withdrawal of benefits at the Post Office, not all current accounts with
 the same bank do. Again, whilst all basic bank accounts allow withdrawals at
 the Post Office, only some allow deposits. Some current accounts also allow
 withdrawals and deposits at the Post Office. Obviously competition is an
 important driving market force and product differentiation of this kind is
 ultimately an advantage to the customer. However, the decisions to be made
 9 3.4% were recorded as ‘not known’ and the remaining 31.6% were not recorded as having support
 needs above and beyond the information provision of the informed choice discussion
 0
 10
 20
 30
 40
 50
 60
 70
 80
 90
 100
 Overall JSA Other Benefits Pension
 Order book to new bank or CU account Order book to new Poca
 Order book to existing bank or CU account Existing Poca to bank or CU account
 Other
 29
 regarding Direct Payment and what sort of an account to use for it require
 complex information to be understood and decoded so that an informed
 decision can be made.
 The informed choice discussion provided an accessible space for people to
 find out more about Direct Payment and the choices available to them. It
 gave them the opportunity to talk about particular barriers that they perceived
 in stopping them from either making a decision about Direct Payment or
 actioning their choice. Providing free, independent and impartial advice on a
 one-to-one basis can be particularly helpful in informing a decision. It also
 allows individuals to discuss their perceptions, needs and opinions. This is
 particularly important among hard-to-reach groups of people who are often
 vulnerable, feel disenfranchised and excluded. Such provision of information
 promotes inclusion and facilitates access.
 30
 Marketing
 Introduction
 Marketing and materials associated with bank products and services can have
 an impact on the perceived accessibility of the product. Existence and
 availability of product information along with key marketing messages form a
 significant first point of access for consumers. It is important to consider the
 content and vehicles for delivering information and how well they reflect the
 needs of the target group. The analysis of basic bank account marketing and
 materials was undertaken to approximate their appropriateness in reaching
 people experiencing financial exclusion. Analysis was considered in the light
 of the Banking Code of March 2005, which makes the following commitments:
 · We will make sure our advertising and promotional literature is clear
 and not misleading and that you are given clear information about our
 products and services
 · We will make sure that all advertising and promotional material is clear,
 fair, reasonable and not misleading
 More detail about rationale for scoring can be found in the section on
 methodology.
 Recommendations
 A certification for marketing material should be created by an
 independent regulator. The criteria for this should be developed with the
 needs of people who are most financially excluded at their core.
 31
 Data
 Fig 8: Rating of different banks’ marketing materials where 0 = poor, 1 =
 acceptable and 2 = good10
 Bank Format of
 material
 Writing
 style
 Basic bank
 account
 features
 Disclosure
 of key
 terms and
 conditions
 Contact
 information
 Overall
 accessibility
 for clients
 Bank A 0 0 1 2 0 1
 Bank B 1 2 2 2 2 2
 Bank C 0 1 1 0 2 1
 Bank D 1 1 2 2 2 2
 Bank E 1 1 2 2 2 2
 Bank F 1 1 1 0 2 1
 Bank G 2 2 2 1 1 2
 Bank H 0 2 0 1 1 0
 Bank I 0 0 1 0 0 0
 Key findings and wider interpretation of data
 · There is wide variation in the provision of marketing and application
 materials for basic bank accounts
 · A number of existing marketing tools appear limited in facilitating
 access for the group basic bank accounts are intended to serve
 Some banks’ materials clearly facilitate access whilst others do not. It would
 appear that in those instances where the materials are good, thought has
 been given to the target group in question. Conversely, where materials do
 not perform well, it would appear that this is because little thought has been
 given to the target group and materials are simply ‘stripped down’ versions of
 current account literature. The financial services industry needs to recognise
 10 It should not be inferred from this table that the order or ranking corresponds to other orders or
 rankings in other parts of the report.
 32
 lower income customer base and profile and orient marketing and application
 materials towards the target group.
 Basic bank account materials should be written in clear, concise English in
 readable print with carefully organised formats. Information should include:
 o Features of the product, including what the product does not do
 o Key terms and conditions, including charges and penalties
 o Information about how to open the account, including guidelines
 on the types of less traditional identification and address
 verification that can be used; offering a free helpline where
 clients can discuss their own situation
 o Opportunities for upgrading after a period of time
 o Contact information
 NB: It is important to note that since SAFE’s work was done it has met with
 banks individually regarding this information. SAFE has received positive
 feedback from its work and steps are being made by individual banks to
 improve their literature. Other banks may also have updated their literature
 since SAFE’s analysis.
 33
 About the product, the basic bank account
 Introduction
 The question of products offered to those on low incomes is not the main
 focus of this report. Research by NCC/Policis11 analyses the needs of low
 income customers, how well these are being met currently and what product
 innovations may improve the situation. However, the basic bank account
 product itself has an important role to play in facilitating financial inclusion and
 is therefore worthy of mention.
 Data
 Fig 9: Basic bank account product features (following page)
 11 NCC/Policis factsheet ‘Basic Banking. Getting the First Step Right’, August 2005
 Recommendations
 Research should be undertaken to consider ways in which innovation
 in product design can facilitate financial inclusion, serve client needs
 and remain commercially viable.
 The basic bank account product should be designed with the needs
 of the target group at its core to prevent discrimination and
 ‘exclusion within inclusion’.
 The financial services industry, Government and others should invest
 in support for newly banked people to enable them to use the
 account in a way that is appropriate to their needs but which remains
 commercially viable.
 34
 Bank Name &
 Account Name
 Post Office
 Access -
 withdrawal (w)
 or deposit (d)
 Minimum
 Amount to
 Open Account
 Cash Machine
 Card
 Alternative to
 Chip & Pin Card
 Available
 Free Buffer
 Zone
 Direct Debits
 and Standing
 Orders
 Charge for
 unpaid Direct
 Debit
 Debit Card
 (Solo or
 Electron)
 Counter
 Service
 Statements
 Impact on Financial
 Inclusion
 Provides local
 network, with
 personal contact.
 Should not be
 only face-to-face
 provision
 Important to be
 zero, so that lack
 of ready cash is
 not a barrier to
 banking
 Increasingly
 essential, but
 should not be
 only access to
 account
 Alternatives to
 chip and pin
 facilitate choices
 and access
 Allows for small
 element of
 security for those
 unused to
 banking and on
 tight budgets
 Facilitates cost
 savings on
 regular bills, and
 builds budgeting
 skills
 Can be
 significant
 portion of
 monthly
 income and
 start debt
 spiral. No
 charge can
 indicate other
 penalties, such
 as account
 closure
 Promotes
 wider financial
 capability
 through noncash
 transactions,
 but
 acceptance in
 shops and
 over the
 internet is
 limited
 Restriction or
 prohibition
 implies 2nd
 class
 customers,
 removes
 support,
 opportunities
 for increasing
 financial
 capability,
 access to
 financial
 advice and
 sales
 opportunities
 Infrequent
 statements
 hinder money
 management
 and
 differentiates
 from other
 account
 holders
 Abbey National w None Yes Chip & Sign No Yes £35 No No Quarterly
 Basic Account
 Alliance & Leicester w & d None Yes Chip & Sign No DD only £34 No No Quarterly
 Basic Cash Account
 Barclays w None Yes Paying in book No DD only £15 No Yes Quarterly
 Cash Card Account
 Co-operative Bank w & d None Yes Chip & Sign No Yes £19.50 Yes Yes Flexible
 Cashminder
 Halifax w None Yes Chip & Sign No Yes £39 No No[1] Quarterly
 Easycash Account
 HSBC w None Yes Chip & Sign £10 Yes No No No Quarterly
 Basic Bank Account Account closed
 if 3 unpaid
 Lloyds TSB w & d None Yes Chip & Sign £10 Yes No No No [2] Quarterly
 Basic Bank Account Account closed
 if 3 unpaid
 Nationwide w £1 Yes Yes No Yes £30 No Yes Quarterly
 FlexAccount Cash
 Card
 NatWest w None Yes Chip & Sign No Yes £38 Yes Yes Monthly
 Step Account
 Royal Bank of
 Scotland
 w None Yes No No Yes £38 No Yes Monthly
 Key Account
 [1] Branch counter can only be utilized to withdraw more than £300 in cash from account. [2] Branch counter can only be utilized to withdraw more than £200 in cash from account.
 35
 Key findings
 · There is little differentiation between basic bank accounts offered.
 · There are a number of restrictions placed on basic bank accounts
 which customers are not often made immediately aware of in marketing
 literature and which cannot therefore inform their decision as to which
 account to open.
 · There is little opportunity for banks to profit from basic bank account
 customers as a result of the attendant risk of including features (such
 as overdrafts) that would enable this.
 The basic bank account product has been developed primarily in response to
 the Government’s Direct Payment initiative. Its aim is to provide an
 introduction to banking and its technologies as well as a step towards greater
 financial inclusion. It is therefore important that the product itself is set up in
 such a way as to facilitate greater skill and confidence among its users in
 managing their money through an account. This means that the ways in
 which customers access their accounts need to be as unthreatening and
 appropriate as possible (within commercial considerations) and not further
 reinforce existing feelings of alienation from banking and banks, whilst
 allowing for a small element of leeway as customers adjust to non-paper
 transactions.
 However, banks have begun to restrict certain features of the basic bank
 account, such as the buffer zone and counter service, suggesting a tendency
 to underserve the needs of low-income clients. Whilst, this is understandable
 in the context of the perceived current profitability of these customers, these
 restrictions hinder access, undermine the likelihood of increased financial
 capability and therefore mitigate against future profitability.
 Restriction of branch access to large transactions, or even total prohibition, is
 detrimental on several levels:
 · It clearly distinguishes basic bank account holders, thus creating
 exclusion within so-called ‘inclusion’;
 · It effectively excludes those who have issues with technology or
 remembering PINs, and
 · It hinders secondary branch functions, such as marketing and sales.
 Those accounts that provide the widest range of functions and access
 optimise the potential for building financial capability, but also maximise the
 potential for mistakes and consequent problems. Thus direct debits, debit
 cards and buffer zones can all be useful features, but misuse can be
 excessively penalised through high charges or account closure.
 36
 The application process
 Introduction
 Visiting the bank and applying for an account are key milestones on the path
 towards achieving financial inclusion. The financial services industry has a
 particularly important role to play in promoting positive messages about
 financial inclusion and ensuring that these messages are reflected in the
 experiences individuals have when they interact with banks. More often than
 not a client will come into contact with a bank through its local high street
 branch. Alongside their corporate activities, the performance of banks at a
 local level is particularly important in defining how well they contribute towards
 financial inclusion. In this section SAFE considers how well financial
 institutions engage with customers experiencing financial exclusion and
 whether any improvements can be made.
 In particular SAFE considers the procedures of the bank with regard to its
 implementation of guidelines to reduce money laundering and the
 performance of its staff across four parameters: knowledge, communication,
 flexibility and procedures for account opening (more detail is provided in the
 methodology section). In developing these criteria for measuring bank
 performance SAFE used the Banking Code. In the Banking Code12, standards
 are set for good banking practice around processes and products. For the
 purposes of this report we have considered those that impact on low income
 customers and those seeking basic bank accounts, in particular the following
 key commitments:
 · Before you become a customer we will give you clear information,
 explaining the key features of the services and products you tell us you
 are interested in.
 · [We will] offer you a basic bank account if you specifically ask, and
 meet the qualifying conditions for one.
 · When you have chosen an account or service, we will give you clear
 information about how it works [and] the terms and conditions.
 · We will deal quickly and sympathetically with things that go wrong and
 consider all cases of financial difficulty sympathetically and positively.
 These were the basis for the various criteria by which the project workers
 assessed their visits to the banks and building societies, as explained in the
 methodology section.
 12 The current edition of the Banking Code took effect in March 2005, and is available through the
 British Bankers’ Association.
 37
 Practical Barriers
 There are various ways in which applications for basic bank accounts have
 been hindered.
 Examples of this include:
 · Branches instituting an appointment system for basic bank accounts
 that ensures that a client will not be able to open the account for a
 significant period of time. Instances of this were noted that included
 a three month waiting list;
 · Not having the application materials for a basic bank account
 available in the branch and not being able get hold of these within a
 short period of time; and,
 · Explicit statements like ‘we cherry pick our customers’.
 38
 Visiting the financial institutions
 Introduction
 The kind of customer service that a bank’s staff provides is important in
 enabling the bank to differentiate itself from competitors who, by and large,
 provide similar products. This is especially the case in the basic bank account
 product range where there is little product differentiation.
 Frontline branch staff will often be the first point of contact for a prospective
 customer. The member of staff they encounter has the ability to reinforce
 negative views of the industry or the opportunity to positively promote the
 bank’s brand and the concept of financial inclusion.
 Recommendations
 To increase the likelihood of full and consistent compliance with the
 Banking Code the Banking Code Standards Board should publish the
 findings of its mystery shopping exercises.
 The financial services industry should empower its customers to
 enable them to know when banks’ behaviour is unacceptable and to
 be able to challenge this when it happens. To this end, the Banking
 Code should be more widely available and produced in different formats
 (interactive screens in branches for instance).
 The financial services industry should take full responsibility for
 enabling and incentivising its staff to sell its products and provide a
 good level of service to all, no matter what their background.
 39
 Throughout the account opening process it is imperative that staff are aware
 of their bank’s policies and wider commitments. It is also important that
 branch staff demonstrate wisdom in the way in which they balance conflicting
 priorities and procedures in the light of individual customer’s needs.
 In order to analyse the data collected, SAFE used four parameters to
 measure branch activities which promote financial inclusion: knowledge,
 communication, flexibility, and procedures. An outline of these is included in
 the section on methodology. These are derived from the spirit of the
 commitments in the Banking Code that are mentioned above.
 Data
 Across all visits where the purpose was account opening, a basic bank
 account was made available on 89% of occasions. Where an account was
 not made available, it means that some action of the bank or its staff
 prevented the individual applying for a basic bank account where it was
 required, for example being required to wait three months for an appointment
 to apply for a basic bank account. Where the account opening process was
 successful, this rose to 100%, where the decision was pending it was 94%
 and where no account was opened it was 62%. There is a clear correlation
 between an account being offered and the likelihood of the account being
 Practical Barriers
 A client seeking employment met with a SAFE project worker, as he had
 previously had to turn down work due to not having a bank account. He
 was mainfestly wary of banks, having been refused several times due to
 lack of adequate documentation, as he does not hold a tenancy or pay bills
 in his own name. He does, however, have a passport and a benefits
 entitlement letter.
 After discussing options with the SAFE project worker, he liked the idea of
 opening a specific basic bank account for which he could apply over the
 phone and would only have to visit the branch to present his ID and
 address verification documentation.
 The phone application went smoothly and he was told that the two forms of
 ID that he was able to produce would be acceptable, as long as he signed
 a ‘financial exclusion’ form when he went into the branch, which would
 suffice in lieu of producing the normally required third or fourth. However, at
 the branch he was told that he would need a letter from his GP as a 3rd
 piece of ID documentation.
 Despite this setback, the client felt confident after this experience at the
 bank and duly returned with the letter from his GP. His documents were
 photocopied and ‘sent off to head office’. However, a few weeks later he
 received a letter from ‘head office’, saying that he could not open the
 account as he had not produced sufficient documentation.
 The client became disillusioned, as he had done as instructed at every turn,
 and had still failed to open the account, and therefore was no longer
 interested in opening an account for future employment.
 40
 opened (as one would expect). Where basic bank accounts are not being
 made available it could be argued that this contravenes the Banking Code.
 There does not seem to have been significant variation in the waiting time or
 length of queues between those occasions where an account was opened
 and where it was declined, but there was a significant difference in the length
 of the conversation. Where an account was opened the average conversation
 length was over 35 minutes, compared with around 10 minutes when the
 application was unsuccessful. How busy a branch is does not appear to be a
 factor in the likelihood of an account being opened, however the length of time
 staff are prepared to invest in the encounter with the customer does.
 Anecdotally, SAFE project workers felt that there was a better response from
 bank staff in the morning, but this does not seem to correlate with account
 opening success rates, which remain fairly constant throughout the day, and
 is clearly subjective. On average, clients waited 7 minutes to be seen by
 anyone. They waited 13 minutes to be seen by a person who could help
 them. In some cases clients waited up to an hour to be seen by a person who
 could help them. The average length of conversations was 25 minutes.
 The following tables show the results from project workers’ surveyed
 experiences. The scale (for all tables) simply rates 0 for a project worker’s
 perception of a bad experience in this area, 1 for an acceptable experience
 and 2 for a good experience.
 Fig 10: Amalgamated ratings across all banks, all visits and all purposes,
 representing 83 visits:
 Knowledge 1.2
 Communication 1
 Procedures 1.3
 Flexibility 1
 This table shows that on a broad scale project workers had acceptable
 interactions with branch staff.
 Fig 11: Ratings for those visits where the purpose of the visit was to open an
 account (as opposed to information gathering or account follow-up),
 representing 6313 visits:
 Knowledge 1.2
 Communication 1.1
 Procedures 1.4
 Flexibility 1.1
 This table highlights the knowledge and implementation of procedures over
 any of the other parameters.
 13 On 3 of these occasions the outcome of the application process was not recorded
 41
 Fig 12: Ratings for the occasions on which the purpose of account opening
 was realised and an account was opened successfully, representing 25 visits:
 Knowledge 1.5
 Communication 1.5
 Procedures 1.5
 Flexibility 1.4
 Where account opening was successful branch staff were rated higher across
 all parameters.
 Fig 13: Ratings for the occasions on which no decision on the application was
 reached, and a decision was still pending, representing 18 visits:
 Knowledge 1.1
 Communication 0.8
 Procedures 1.5
 Flexibility 1.2
 This table shows again that branch staff have a better than acceptable
 awareness of the branch’s procedures. However, this sits in contrast with
 their less than acceptable level of communication and may account for the
 pending decision in these cases.
 Fig 14: Ratings for the occasions on which the application was declined,
 representing 15 visits:
 Knowledge 0.8
 Communication 0.6
 Procedures 1
 Flexibility 0.4
 Interestingly, this table highlights again that staff are generally aware of the
 procedures involved in account opening. However, their limited
 communication and flexibility resulted in applications being declined.
 Key findings and wider interpretation of data
 · Basic bank accounts are not always made available, even where they
 are offered. This contravenes the spirit of the Banking Code.
 · Branch staff tend to have a reasonable awareness of their bank’s
 procedures and products but are not always able to communicate
 these to the target group as well as might be expected.
 42
 · Branch staff tend to be less good at applying flexibility to these
 procedures or communicating effectively with customers.
 · The commitment in the Banking Code to ‘consider all cases of financial
 difficulty sympathetically and positively’, does not seem to extend to
 prospective customers, with customers on low incomes often facing
 barriers that hinder their accessing even a basic bank account.
 Overall the surveys show branches performed at an ‘acceptable’ level. This
 level of service can perhaps be more easily accommodated by the majority of
 bank customers. However in relation to vulnerable groups this level of service
 has an impact on the accessibility of the service and reinforces negative views
 of the financial services industry among low income groups. Without further
 research it would be difficult to evidence whether the level of service was as a
 result of the fact that the clients SAFE worked with required additional
 flexibility which staff were simply unused to providing; or whether the level of
 service resulted from staff’s perception of the client group as unprofitable and
 therefore simply not worth the effort. In SAFE’s judgement it is a mixture of
 the both.
 All the surveys showed that branch staff had a reasonable understanding of
 their bank’s procedures. However, branch staff scored lowest marks for
 flexibility and communication, confirming SAFE’s experience that staff can
 improve in their ability to serve people with minority needs. Given the
 commitments in the Banking Code to give ‘clear information’, this is an area
 that should be looked at more closely. Future staff training should ensure
 these aspects of the Banking Code and how they can be practically
 implemented are covered.
 Staff behaviour correlates to achieving financial inclusion. Where staff were
 most knowledgeable, most able to communicate effectively with the customer
 and most able t
 |  
 
		
			| 
					
						| ID: | 36443 |  
						| Author(s): | Clark, Adam; Forter, Alexandra |  
						| Publication date: | 01/11/05 |  |  |  |  | 
 |  |  | 
 Created: 02/01/06. Last changed: 02/05/07.Information concerning property and copy right of the content will be given by the Institut For Financial Services (IFF) on demand. A lack of explicit information on this web site does not imply any right for free usage of any content.
 |