Access to cash: why Link is putting communities first

My spelling above is atrocious – sorry. “Dree” = free; “halve” = have; “whiles” = whilst; 🙁 🙁 🙁

I reckon that maintenance costs are a significant factor in deciding whether or not to retain an ATM, but the fewer there are the more wear and tear each will suffer.

The same applies to the card readers in shops, some of them are in a terrible state.

Thanks for replying, John. I was not aware of the app, which looks very useful. It would be helpful if it could be advertised on the website, for example on the ATM Locator page.

The app is helpful in showing the route by road. Taking where I live as an example, the app correctly shows our village shop as the nearest ATM, about 1.3 miles by road.

In contrast, the website ATM Locator shows Morrisons as the nearest ATM, 0.67 miles away. That would involve crossing private land and scaling high fences! The route by road is over three miles. Having the ATM locator on a website is useful but I respectfully suggest that it is updated to match the app.

If I see problems with a machine on my travels, I will report them as you have suggested. It would be helpful if all ATMs did have provide contact details to report problems because I have been met with ‘It’s nothing to do with us’ responses.

I have long regarded Link as a good example of useful cooperation between competing companies, and long may it continue.

We must consider that many – probably the majority of – people give cash to other recipients than just regular businesses, as various Convo contributors have explained.

People want access to cash. I want to see the vast majority having such access, far more than ATM’s, banks and post offices could ever provide. If businesses take in cash as part of their payments mix, they can also dispense it to provide its convenient availability right across the UK.

There is no need for statistics to be aware that many areas that did have ATMs and Post Offices have lost them.

In our small town there are 12 sites with free ATMs, some with multiple machines. I see that Morrisons, which is in a small retail area outside the town now has four ATMs. Our Post Office has gained an ATM. That’s great for me and most people that regularly visit town and city centres but it does not help those living in the highlands of Scotland or the wilds of Wales.

I think that’s the main point. The very folk who might need cash are also possibly the very folk who don’t have easy access to transport.

One answer might be to ask GP surgeries to host an ATM. Just about every where currently has those, although for how much longer is open for debate…

One thought, how do all these people who cannot access cash manage to feed and clothe themselves?

Ian – That’s a possibility, but unless GP surgeries are modern multi-GP practices they might be lost in future. I have twice had to move GP surgery and see that the one I used until three years ago has now closed.

What would work best will depend on location and security considerations, but village halls, community centres and even schools are other possibilities.

Many ATMs have been lost as a result of closure of banks. Eventually we will see the need for planning of local facilities, which does seem to happen when new housing estates.

Exactly, Alfa. We are not actually hearing squeals of outrage from the highlands and islands, the moors and the mountains. As I think I said recently, most people throughout the country seem to manage to be able to get their food and household supplies every week and everybody has a postal delivery service. In remote areas ways have been found of getting access to cash.

I think the statistics Malcolm has supplied are very useful in framing the discussion. It is arguable that we have been spoiled with a costly excess of cashpoint provision and a large number of superfluous machines that are uneconomical to manage.

Where there are multiple machines in a single location I suggest that should count as one facility. We seem to get stressed out nowadays about spending more than a second waiting for something. Our local big Sainsbury’s store has just one machine and I have never seen more than one person waiting to use it.

If I was going on holiday to a remote location I would get enough cash in advance to ensure I would not be inconvenienced or drain the local facilities.

Most new housing developments of any size seem to quickly get a supermarket or convenience store with a free-to-use ATM. This also becomes useful for other people living in the area.

Until recently, most pubs dealt almost exclusively in cash. They would have been the ideal places to operate a cash-exchange service but publicans have always been averse to cashing cheques or giving customers credit – for understandable reasons generally. But the debit card has removed all such risks and I can see no reasons why community pubs could not offer such a service to their locals and regulars.

“There is no need for statistics….“. Not unless you want to look at an issue in the round.
“Many ATMs have been lost as a result of closure of banks” but many other cash outlets than ever existed have been provided.
“those living in the highlands of Scotland or the wilds of Wales.” Did they all always live close to a bank branch to withdraw their money?

We are not going to provide thousands more ATMs, restore bank branches so we need to keep an open mind in other ways of providing access to cash to many more people than ever had access in the past. In my view.

I think providing information on topics is an essential part of a Convo, for those who want to explore the way forward.

Putting ATMs in GP’s surgeries is a positive suggestion.

John wrote: “Where there are multiple machines in a single location I suggest that should count as one facility.”

Link is not consistent here. For example the nearest Tesco has two ATMs but are shown as a single ATM by Link, whereas the four at Morrisons have four entries.

I presume that having multiple ATMs at a supermarket etc. is because it’s less of a problem if one runs out of cash.

Yes, but it is still basically one cash facility.

I believe the vaults of cash machines can contain £100,000 or more. It is a logistical exercise to keep them topped up for peak demand periods.

John: when you said “We seem to get stressed out nowadays about spending more than a second waiting for something.” I’ve noticed that, too; delayed gratification used to be a male prerogative but it seems fairly ubiquitous, now.

It’s a very interesting topic, in fact, to which there’s no simple answer. A good example of this is the TV. Early sets took an eternity to warm up and produce an image, then we moved on to largely IC-based sets, which seemed to come on almost instantly, Eventually we moved to the current position, which is where the TV set is little more than a device hub, so all the extra boxes need to be powered up and I suspect from my experience we now have to wait longer than we did in the earliest days for the selected programme to appear.

In a sense, next-day delivery is analogous to the introduction of the IC-based TVs; we’ve become used to getting things within 24 hours in the same way many have learned to anticipate getting ill by about a week or so, in order to get an appointment at the surgery.

We adapt, which is how life survives. And Alfa’s question was significant; many do indeed seem to be coping without easy access to cash. And I can pay cheques into our account via an iPad in the house.

So the question has to be how vital are ATMs?

I suspect they remain vital, if only because the shadow economy would disappear without them.

I don’t disagree, John, but was just giving an example of the inconsistency I have encountered in whether a group of ATMs can be recorded.

I presume that the larger ATMs are remotely monitored.

Hey Malcolm,

Thanks again for the comment. Stop me if you’ve heard this already, but I’ll endeavour to clarify a bit of the numbers that you see in the headlines.

The overall figure of 578 free-to-use ATMs closing a month comes from the investigations that Which? released back in September. These are ATMs which were free to use, but have since either closed entirely, or converted to pay-to-use, and 578 is the average number either switched or closed each month in the first half of this year, nationally.

The protected ATMs differ slightly from the figure above. These are ATMs that are specifically protected from closure and from charging a fee; with the majority of ATMs not being protected, it is possible that the number of protected ATMs could increase while the overall number of free-to-use ATMs declines nationwide.

In our news story we do offer some wider mapping (scroll down to “Cash machine and bank branch closures”), showing where the overall proportion of free-to-use ATMs is declining. This shows the overall figure as proportion of free-to-use ATMs closing in each region of the country, and explains further how our analysis incorporated Indicies of Multiple Deprivation to reach the conclusion of how these closures are impacting certain parts of the country and that, based on these indicies, areas where more free-to-use ATMs are closing tend to be poorer.

We haven’t actually made the connection to the population of these areas being older. The tweet you’ve cited is actually quoting the author of the op-ed in the Telegraph rather than our press release.

We’ve not gone more granular with the data than the national averages as the story we’re telling with these headlines is both the pace of the closures nationwide, and in the impact an ATM closure has. Why these ATMs may close may vary, and likely depends on the local context of where they are. Some may be in an area well populated with ATMs as you’ve suggested, and therefore may not prove cost effective to run, while others may have been attached to a business or bank that has been closed, or may be the only ATM in the area but aren’t protected, and therefore need fees to cover the costs of operation. Some might have even been torn out of the wall with construction equipment and then deemed not cost effective to be replaced, as was the case with the nearest ATM to where I live. The research has told the first part of the story, and people sharing their stories with us (particularly through the conversation) have illustrated the latter bit.

You’re right in it being a constructive proposal to enable people to pay how they want though, and ATM aspect is one piece of a larger puzzle. Focussing on the number of closures is one of the most visible (and visibly alarming) way to illustrate a societal change that may have a disproportionate impact on people who would rely on such a provision, and one of the aims of the Freedom to Pay campaign is to ensure people who choose to pay in this way can continue to do so. There is, however, more to come with the next phase of the campaign which I won’t give away here (date TBC at this stage), but will bring in a fuller picture of what it means for people to have the freedom to pay when that doesn’t necessarily mean cash.

Apologies for the delay in replying to you on this, getting all of this information has involved a bit of running around on my part.

Thank you for the additional information Jon. It reinforces a point I made previously, however, that the number of machines withdrawn and the rate of withdrawal are relative to a historical position that was probably not realistic and that as economies have become necessary following the 2008-onwards recession, banks are being more cautious on where they site machines and how many they can provide and support. It is highly likely that a large number of ATM’s became due for replacement over a certain period [a number of years after the boom in provision] and the opportunity was taken to cull the numbers not just to save the capital cost of replacement but to save on servicing and management expenditure in line with actual levels of use.

I appreciate that is no comfort to people who have lost machines in their areas or are now faced with having to pay to withdraw cash, but – at the risk of being controversial – it is possible that areas of deprivation are not populated by many people in possession of a bank card, so ATM use is naturally lower and possibly uneconomic.