Arrogant assumptions of electronic abilities

Wow! That’s a long title.

I have spoken about this topic before in relation to the expectation that everyone can and will be able to access a computer. Here are some more thoughts sparked by a news item I caught the tail end of on television last night.

The article in question was regarding Lloyds bank in the UK that was closing many of it’s branches and focusing on delivering services digitally. This is a concern for a number of reasons. Having worked as a Social Worker for many years, one of the first questions I ask when getting personal information is this. “Do you have an email address?” and followed by “Do you use it?” It is often surprising the number of people who do not have an email address and/or some that do have an email address but do not use it. Those that have such an address – but do not use it – often told me that a family member had told them to sign up for email, but they seldom use it. Given this scenario, getting email details is not going to have any real purpose. The person in front of me will need to be contacted in another way. In my experience, if the person does not use email, they are extremely unlikely to use electronic banking.

Looking at the article regarding Lloyds Bank, I have a number of concerns.

• Those who do not use technology will be unable to have ready access to their funds as they would have done previously, by going to their local banking branch.
• For many elderly, routine is important and community connections are important. Going to the bank on pension day to draw out their pension, may be the only social outlet they have and they will – in a lot of cases – feel they have a relationship with those that work at the bank. They may be known by name and a short conversation with the bank teller may be the highlight of that day or even that week.
• If access electronically is required, the elderly may not have a computer or cellphone. Some may not even use debit cards, continuing to rely on withdrawing cash.
• If access electronically to funds is needed this could open vulnerable adults of any age to abuse. If a person has anyone coming in to help in the home, they may ask them to assist with setting up electronic access to banking. This would mean setting a password on their account and assistance with setting this up. This runs a risk as the person who assists in the process would then know the password and customer number and potentially could access funds without authorisation. Also, if they rely on assistance to access their funds, they could become concerned if they become aware that their funds are being taken. However, if needed for other tasks and their only social contact they may feel forced to continue allowing access.
• Those who do not have family or friends they can trust could be preyed on by unscrupulous individuals and the vulnerable person may have no-one to help them if this occurs.

There are likely to be many people adversely affected by the closure of the branches. That of course includes the staff themselves. Often in smaller branches some staff may have been at the branch for many years, getting to know the local customers. If the staff are in the older age group – say 50+ – and if their work experience has been working in a bank for most of their working lives, getting further employment may be problematic. This could be a particular risk if the person has health issues that may be seen to impact on their performance.

For those with any condition that affects their mobility such as Parkinson’s they may be unable to get to another branch if it is not in close proximity to where they live. They may not be able to drive or use public transport because of physical mobility issues. They could also conceivably not be familiar with how to use the bus system. The local branch may be within a walkable distance and therefore enable them to continue to be able to withdraw money independently. Taking away the ability to go to the local branch may take away the ability to independently access their funds.

Life these days is full of electronic means of accessing goods and services. There are too many to list. Self-checkouts and QR codes spring to mind!

This latest initiative by an organization is guilty of what I have referred to as the “Arrogant Assumption” that everyone can and does access the world electronically. Unfortunately, for those who are unable to join the electronic world this is likely to become increasingly problematic.

Where is the humanity in all of this?

Where is the customer service provision in all of this?

Who will fight for the rights of those affected by this insistence on unwanted electronic interference in their lives?