2 The landscape of retail banking
in the UK
What is retail banking?
20. The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has categorised
retail banking services into three broad areas:
- Core banking services: personal
and business current accounts, overdrafts and savings products
traditionally associated with banks.
- Secondary banking services:
unsecured and secured
loans to personal and SME customers, including credit cards and
mortgages.
- Peripheral banking services:
such as insurance, pensions,
wealth management, hedging, letters of credit and legal services.
The OFT notes that peripheral banking services, are
not typically considered as retail banking services.[13]
Our focus in this competition and choice inquiry has been on core
and secondary banking services.
21. There is no requirement for a retail banking
provider to supply both core and secondary banking services to
personal and SME customers. Indeed, as the OFT notes, many providers
have entered the retail banking market but concentrated on only
a sub-set of services and products. The provision of core banking
services will typically require authorisation from the Financial
Services Authority to accept deposits. The provision of some secondary
banking services will require a consumer credit licence from the
OFT or authorisation from the FSA.
22. An alternative way to look at the retail market
is through type of provider. There are three main types of provider:
- Retail banks which
predominantly accept deposits and use these funds (together with
funding from the wholesale market) to make loans as well as offering
other financial products to consumers and firms. Lloyds Banking
Group would fall into this category.
- Universal banks which
not only offer retail services but are also involved in wholesale
and investment banking activities. Barclays, HSBC and RBS would
fall into this category.
- Building societiesmutual
institutions whose principal purpose is to accept savings and
make loans.
Other types of provider include monoline providerssuch
as Capital Onewhich focus on a single product or product
line; credit unions, financial co-operatives owned and controlled
by their members and offering banking products; and non-traditional
financial institutions offering banking products, often through
a joint venture or a white label agreement[14]
with an established retail banking provider. Finally, it is worth
noting that recent years have seen the rise of peer-to-peer facilitators,
firms that act as facilitators for matching lenders and borrowers.
We discuss the issue of diversity of type of provider in greater
detail later in this Report.
23. The choice of distribution channel varies between
business models. Channels include the use of a branch network,
the internet, telephone, post and intermediaries and other third
parties. The internet is a relatively recent distribution channel
which is often seen as particularly important as a catalyst for
increased competition. However, physical branch facilities remain
importantthe OFT found that 77% of consumers would not
consider using a retail banking provider that had no branches
and only operated an internet and telephone service. This figure
was lower for savings/investment and loan products.[15]
As the market share tables on the following pages show, stand
alone internet banks have only limited penetration in most retail
markets.
Drivers of consolidation and increased
concentration
24. The OFT's Review of barriers to entry, expansion
and exit in retail banking concluded that "the financial
crisis has had a major impact on retail banking in the UK",
outlining that "one very visible effect has been the consolidation
of a number of well-known banking brands resulting in greater
concentration across the sector", although "the degree
of concentration differs in each product market."[16]
25. The main driver of consolidation in the sector
has been a significant increase in mergers as well as the exit
from the UK market of some overseas operators. Which? noted that
since April 2008, there have been 14 mergers. Nine mergers involved
mutual building societies. Ten mergers arose because of concerns
over capital or losses incurred through the crisis. Of these,
the largest by far was the merger of Lloyds TSB and HBOS, which
is now the market leader in many sectors of the market.[17]
Table 1: Mergers and Acquisitions in UK Banking
(since April 2008)
Year
| Financial Institution
| Merged with/ Acquired
|
2008 | Santander
| Alliance & Leicester
|
2008 | Santander (Abbey)
| Bradford and Bingley (savings and branches)
|
2008 | ING Direct
| Heritable
Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander
|
2008 | Chelsea Building Society
| Catholic Building Society
|
2008 | Nationwide Building Society
| Cheshire Building Society
|
2008 | Nationwide Building Society
| Derbyshire Building Society
|
2008 | Lloyds-TSB
| HboS |
2008 | Yorkshire Building Society
| Barnsley Building Society
|
2009 | Co-operative Financial Services
| Britannia Building Society
|
2009 | Yorkshire Building Society
| Chelsea Building Society
|
2009 | Nationwide Building Society
| Dunfermline Building Society
|
2009 | Skipton Building Society
| Scarborough Building Society
|
2010 | Barclays
| Standard Life Bank |
2010 | Coventry Building Society
| Stroud and Swindon Building Society
|
Sources: Bank of England (2008). 'Financial Stability Report',
Issue 24, pgs 24-25, pub: Bank of England: London. Office of Fair
Trading (2010).'Merger Cases', accessed at OFT website http://www.oft.gov.uk/advice_and_resources/resource_base/Mergers_home/Mergers_Cases/
26. Virgin Money contrasted the present state of the UK retail
market with that prevailing twenty years ago when "there
were many more providers of personal banking services and a much
greater variety of providers". They argued that twenty years
agoin addition to the big fourcustomers could choose
as alternatives:
the two Scottish banks (RBS and Bank of Scotland), the unique
TSB, the converted bank Abbey National and the about-to-convert
Halifax, and a number of building societies with national distribution
including Nationwide, Cheltenham & Gloucester, Woolwich, Northern
Rock, Alliance & Leicester and Bradford & Bingley. Many
of these providers were retail-only, and they competed effectively
with the 'Big Four' by offering a different product focus or service
proposition, reflecting the priorities of their stakeholders.
They concluded that now, in the UK, there "was no credible
alternative to the large banks for full-service banking, except
to some extent Nationwide and the UK subsidiaries of National
Australia Bank".[18]
Others took a different view, pointing to the entry, over the
last twenty years, of many current and former building societies
into the personal current account and SME markets. They also noted
significant entry of providers often foreign-basedinto
the savings, mortgages, loans and credit card markets as well
as the entry of banks into the mortgage and savings markets over
this period.
27. The financial crisis has resulted in significant consolidation
of the UK retail market. Well known firms such as HBOS, Alliance
& Leicester and Bradford and Bingley have either exited the
market or merged with rival firms. A large number of building
societies have merged, undermining the diversity of provision
in the sector. Whilst these 'rescues' were necessary in order
to preserve financial stability, the consequence has been to reduce
competition and choice in the market. We examine the Lloyds
TSB/HBOS merger as well as diversity of provision and, in particular,
the mutual sector in greater detail later in this report.
Market shares and concentration levels in key
retail markets
28. Even though there is considerable variation in the number
of firms in particular segments of the retail market, there is
a high degree of concentration in key parts of the market. The
Herfindahl-Hirschmann Index (HHI) is a measure of market concentration
that takes account of the differences in the sizes of market participants,
as well as their number. It is often used to assess the degree
of concentration in a particular market.[19]
The recent OFT/Competition Commission (CC) merger guidelines note
that a market with an HHI measure exceeding 1,000 could be characterised
as 'concentrated' whilst a market with HHI measures exceeding
2,000 could be characterised as 'highly concentrated'.[20]
29. Personal and business current accounts are dominated by the
major banks. The five leading banksLloyds Banking Group,
RBS, HSBC, Barclays and Santanderhave an 85% share of the
personal current account market. The four largest firms in the
business current account marketRBS, Lloyds Banking Group,
Barclays and HSBChave a 78% market share. However, in other
parts of the retail market, they appear to face a greater number
of competitors. For example, the five leading firms in the unsecured
personal loan market account for 64% of the market and in the
savings account market the largest five firms account for just
63% of the market.[21]
In the following sections we examine in greater detail the market
shares of the leading firms as well as the number of other providers
in the different segments of the retail market.
PERSONAL CURRENT ACCOUNTS
30. The personal current account is the cornerstone of Britain's
retail financial system. Broadly speaking, a personal current
account can be defined as an account for individual consumers,
which provides the facility to hold deposits, receive and make
payments using cheques, debit cards, Direct Debits and standing
orders, to use ATMs and to make regular payments. Additionally,
PCAs often have overdraft facilities. Datamonitor's most recent
estimates suggest that 93% of adults in the UK hold a current
account and that there were approximately 71 million accounts
in the UK.[22]
31. This market is dominated by the five largest PCA providersLloyds
Banking Group, RBS, HSBC, Barclays and Santander; Lloyds Banking
Group has 30% of the marketalmost double the market share
of their nearest competitor RBS. When Sir Donald Cruickshank examined
competition in UK banking in 1998, the four largest banksat
that time, Lloyds TSB, NatWest, Barclays and HSBC including all
subsidiaries[23]had
a 68% market share; the equivalent today is 73%.
32. The Cruickshank report showed an HHI for current accounts
of 1,330 for 1998 which was described as "indicating a relatively
high level of concentration."[24]
Concentration increased even after the Cruickshank report, and
has been made even more acute by the post-crisis consolidation
described above. The HHI for the personal current account market
rose from 1,410 in 2007, to 1,736 in 2010, an increase of 374.[25]
Table 2: PCA market shares pre- and post-financial
crisis, by number of customers

Source: OFT, Review of barriers to entry, expansion
and exit in retail banking (Table 3.2)
MORTGAGE MARKET
33. The five largest providersLloyds Banking
Group, Santander, Nationwide Building Society, RBS and HSBCaccount
for over 75% of gross new lending in the mortgage market.
34. The mortgage market looks less concentrated when
examining the existing stock of mortgages held by consumers
(outstanding balance), where the five largest providers account
for only 63% of the market. However, at the time of the 1998 Cruickshank
report the big four banks had only a 17% share of this market
when measured by number of mortgages.[26]
Even now, 29% of the stock of mortgages is held by banks described
by the term 'other' category in the table which includes other
banks, building societies and specialist lenders. The large difference
in the figures for this group15% of gross lending market
share as opposed to 29% of outstanding balance market shareappears
to reflect the lower levels of lending made by specialist mortgage
providers following the financial crisis, in part, due to their
reduced ability to source mortgages using wholesale finance. The
financial crisis has resulted in the disappearance from the market
of a significant number of specialist or foreign lenders.[27]
Again Lloyds Banking Group is the largest provider in both categories
of the mortgage market.
Table 3: Total mortgage market shares, gross lending
and outstanding balances, 2009
Mortgage provider
| Gross lending, market share (%)
| Outstanding balance, market share (%)
|
Lloyds Banking Group |
24 | 28
|
Santander | 18
| 13 |
Nationwide Building Society
| 8 | 10
|
Royal Bank of Scotland Group
| 13 | 7
|
HSBC | 11
| 5 |
Barclays/Woolwich | 10
| 7 |
Others | 15
| 29 |
Source: OFT, Review of barriers to entry, expansion
and exit in retail banking (Table 3.4)
SAVINGS ACCOUNTS
35. There has also been consolidation in the savings
account market. The five largest providersLloyds Banking
Group, Santander, RBS, Barclays and Nationwideaccount for
62% of the market rather than the 56% of the market held by the
five largest providers in 2006. Lloyds Banking Group once again
has the largest presence in this sector of the retail market.
There is a larger tail of providers with relatively small market
shares in the savings market as compared to the personal current
account market, but even so concentration in this market has increased.
In 1998, the Cruickshank report noted the HHI was 910.[28]
Although concentration reduced for a while, the HHI in the savings
account market has risen from 889 in October 2006 to 1,083 in
February 2010an increase of 194.[29]
Table 4: Saving accounts market shares pre-and
post-financial crisis, by number of customers

Source: OFT, Review of barriers to entry, expansion
and exit in retail banking (Table 3.3)
UNSECURED PERSONAL LOANS
36. The top five providers of unsecured personal
loans account for over 60% of this market. Once again Lloyds Banking
Group has almost double the market share of its nearest competitor,
Barclays.
Table 5: Unsecured personal loan market shares,
by number of customers, 2009
Unsecured lending provider
| Personal loan Sept
2009, market share (%)
|
Lloyds Banking Group |
25 |
Barclays | 13
|
Santander | 10
|
Royal Bank of Scotland Group
| 9 |
HSBC | 7
|
Nationwide Building Society
| 4 |
Northern Rock | 3
|
Co-op | 1
|
Other high street bank |
2 |
Other building society |
0.5 |
Direct/specialist loan company
| 7 |
Retailer | 7
|
Internet only/direct bank
| 3 |
Credit card issuer |
0.5 |
Other | 11
|
Source: OFT, Review of barriers to entry, expansion
and exit in retail banking (Table 3.6)
SME MARKET
37. The latest available data (2008) on liquidity
management services suggests that four banks account for nearly
80% of the SME market. The OFT states that more recent data following
the financial crisis is not available, though it warns that it
is likely that the market will have become more concentrated due
to recent consolidation in retail banking, in particular the merger
of Lloyds TSB with HBOS and Santander with Alliance & Leicester.
The HHI in this segment of the market was 1,604 which the OFT/CC
guideline notes define as a 'concentrated' market.
Table 6: SME liquidity management services market
shares, by number of accounts, 2008
Provider
| 2008, market share (%)
|
Royal Bank of Scotland Group
| 23 |
Lloyds TSB | 19
|
Barclays | 18
|
HSBC | 18
|
Alliance & Leicester
| 6 |
HBOS | 4
|
Clydesdale | 3
|
Co-operative Bank | 2
|
Abbey | 1
|
Others | 6
|
Source: OFT, Review of barriers to entry, expansion
and exit in retail banking (Table 3.8)
Conclusions on concentration
levels
38. There has been a clear increase in concentration
levels in parts of the retail market. Indeed, concentration in
many sectors of the market is now higher than when Sir Donald
Cruickshank examined competition in retail banking, particularly
in the personal current account and SME markets. The five large
banksLloyds Banking Group, RBS, Barclays, HSBC and Santanderhave
an overwhelming 85% share of the personal current account market.
In 2008 the market for SME liquidity services was dominated by
just four firms who shared 80% of the market. Other parts of the
retail market such as those for savings products and loans, where
the number of participants is larger, are less concentrated.
39. Whilst the level of concentration is just
one measure of competition in a market, it is important. Concentrated
markets also make it easier for firms to collude by making it
easier for competitors to monitor each other. If banks imitate
the products and services of their competitors the intensity of
competition is reduced and this can lead to a consumer perception
that there is no real difference in the products and services
of the major banks.
Does increased concentration
matter?
40. The large incumbent banks acknowledged that the
financial crisis had led to consolidation within the sector and
an increase in concentration levels.[30]
However, they also claimed that there was no necessary link between
concentration and the degree of competition taking place in a
particular market and that the UK retail market was not concentrated
by international standards or by the standards of other industries.
THE LINK BETWEEN CONCENTRATION AND
COMPETITION
41. The large banks argued that whilst concentration
had increased this had had little or no bearing on competition
in the sector. Barclays noted that whilst there had "been
consolidation", "despite these changes, the landscape
remains competitive and dynamic with the emergence of new competitors,
products and consumer propositions."[31]
The large banks also pointed to the emergence of new entrantssuch
as Metro Bank and Virgin Moneyas proof that competition
was taking place.[32]
42. Joe Garner, Deputy Chief Executive UK at HSBC
addressing the issue of concentration, told us that "there
seems to be a perception at times that there are three or four
major players; there are at least six major players in the UK
market."[33] Eric
Daniels, then Group Chief Executive at Lloyds Banking Group, told
us that "concentration does not lead to a lack of competition",
[34] but at the same
time pointed to the large number of firms in certain segments
of the retail market as proof that competition was working. For
example, Mr Daniels pointed out that there were "60 competitors"
in the mortgage market, that the current account market had "about
30" and there were "about 80 competitors in the savings
market".[35] He
said that "you have a very wide variety of players that are
offering different products", describing "the number
of mortgage products as absolutely phenomenal", concluding
that "customers have real choice"[36]
and that this was "an enormously competitive market".[37]
This argument was also deployed by Stephen Hester, Chief Executive,
RBS, who spoke of "60-odd credit card providers or 80-odd
savings providers," concluding there were "obviously
plenty of second-tier players in banking."[38]
COMPARISONS WITH OTHER SECTORS
43. Furthermore, Lloyds Banking Group told us that
their analysis showed that "the market for banking services
is significantly less concentrated than those for utilities, grocery
retail, mobile telecommunications, and the fiercely pro-competitive
home broadband and pay TV markets."[39]
This was a point picked up by Brian Hartzer when he gave evidence.
Mr Hartzer referred to the supermarket industry, which he described
as more concentrated than banking, but where the competition authorities
had "found good consumer outcomes."[40]
More broadly, Mr Hartzer was keen to stress the lack of a simple
relationship between concentration levels and consumer outcomes,
stating that "we see markets in many industries around the
world with different levels of concentration and different consumer
outcomes"[41] Lloyds
Banking Group said utilities, grocery retail and mobile telecommunications
are more concentrated than the retail banking sector. However,
we note that all the industries highlighted for comparison are
either directly regulated (such as utilities) or have themselves
been subject to multiple competition inquiries and regulatory
interventions (grocery retail, mobile telecommunications, retail
broadband and Pay TV).
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
44. Mr Daniels also contrasted the level of concentration
in the UK market with overseas:
if you look at the concentration in the UK market
it, in fact, is less than many markets. If you look at Australia,
or you look at Canada or France, for example, you would find even
greater concentrations. The US and Germany are often looked at
as markets that are more fragmented and would display more of
the kind of behaviours that you had suggested. In fact they are
every bit as concentrated if you look by region. So if you looked
in California, for example, and you looked at the concentration
levels there, they would in fact be higher than the UK.[42]
Mr Daniels said the UK market was a 'contestable'
one"if you have a market where you have several different
competitors and there's high concentration but there's high contestabilityin
other words players will seek to gain share and therefore will
fight very hard on service, on advertising, on trying to reach
out to customersthat leads to very good customer outcomes."[43]
Joe Garner noted that when "we look around the world and
we can see markets where there are a greater number of players,
they often then tend to be regionalised". He explained that
"if you have a greater number of players, but there is only
one in your locality, it still has not improved choice."[44]
We disagree strongly with the assertion that the UK retail
banking market is contestable. A market is contestable if entry
and exit barriers are low and whilst this may be the case in certain
parts of the retail market, it does not appear to be the case
in parts of the personal current account and SME markets. Furthermore,
the financial crisis has demonstrated that exit barriers in the
UK banking market are anything but low.
HOW COMPETITIVE IS RETAIL BANKING?
45. Others disagreed with the arguments put forward
by the large banks, arguing that high levels of concentration
combined with the particular dynamics of some parts of the retail
market had had a negative impact on competition. John Fingleton,
the Chief Executive of the OFT, characterised the banking sector
as "concentrated" whilst his colleague Clive Maxwell,
Executive Director, OFT, singled out "the personal current
account and SME markets as the most concentrated as well as suffering
from the highest levels of [consumer] inertia".[45]
Mr Fingleton stressed that "we see many concentrated markets
where there is very good performance in terms of competition"
adding that "concentration is not itself the source of the
problem" but that one needed to examine "how the dynamics
of the market work." He argued that retail banking:
[...] is clearly much less competitive than a
lot of the sectors we look at. In huge sectors of the economyretailing,
distribution, airline transport, and so onwe see high levels
of competition, innovation, costs coming down and no real difficulty
in firms earning a profit for their shareholders and managing
to pass on low prices to customers, being very innovative in the
process and driving up productivity growth in the economy. That
picture does not characterise the banking sector.[46]
He concluded that he was "on the side of thinking
that the market could be more competitive" again singling
out the personal current account and SME markets as particular
areas of concern.[47]
The particular dynamics of the market singled out by Mr Fingleton
and the OFT were the lack of transparency, low levels of switching
and strong customer inertia.
46. This was a theme picked up by Benny Higgins,
Chief Executive, Tesco Bank, when we questioned him whether the
market for current accounts was competitive:
Let's address the question: is the market for
current accounts competitive? Well, if we go back to first principles:
what would make a market competitive? A market would be competitive
if there was a sufficient number of suppliers offering a sufficient
range of choice to customers in an environment where the customers
are well informed through transparency and full availability of
information and where there are no perceived or real barriers
to switching. If we address the PCA market against that level
of criteria, I think it becomes very clear that we don't need
to hint at a conclusion. It's an unequivocal conclusion that the
market is not competitive.[48]
47. We asked the CEO of another growing entrant in
the sector, Jayne-Anne Gadhia, Chief Executive, Virgin Money,
whether she agreed with comments by Stephen Hester, Eric Daniels
and other representatives from the large banks that retail banking
in the UK was "enormously competitive". Ms Gadhia disagreed
strongly:
I think the comments are surprising because,
in my mind, one of the most significant barriers to entry, competition
and consumer choice in the UK is what is, I believe, an effective
oligopoly of the five big banks, and while I've seen in evidence
that a number of the big banks have said that the market is very
competitive, when you look at the factsand I think they're
importantthat those five big banks together operate almost
90% of the current account market and more than 90% of the SME
market, I think that it's hard to say that the market that customers
should be enjoying is, in any way, properly competitive so that
consumers get the best deal.[49]
48. Ms Gadhia's reference to consumers getting a
good deal was also made by Hector Sants, Chief Executive, FSA,
who told us that there was "a credible argument to be made
that some benefits would accrue from reduced concentration in
certain areas."[50]
Lord Turner, the Chairman of the FSA, also agreed that "a
somewhat wider set of retail banks [...] could be a good thing."
[51]
49. The relationship between concentration and competition
has been noted by the Independent Commission on Banking who have
stated that:
The degree of concentration in a marketfor
example, as measured by the market shares of the largest firmsis
not always a reliable indicator of the degree of competition.
Competition can be strong in quite concentrated markets and weak
in markets that are not highly concentrated.
Nevertheless the Commission concluded that there
was "a tendency, all else equal, for markets to be less competitive
when more concentrated".[52]
50. We note the argument of the large banks that
there is no necessary link between concentration levels and the
degree of effective competition. Indeed, we agree that certain
markets are highly competitive whilst on some measures also being
highly concentrated. Nevertheless, the bulk of our evidence argued
that the banking market was not competitive. Like the Independent
Commission on Banking we consider there is "a tendency, all
else equal, for markets to be less competitive when more concentrated";
it is legitimate to be concerned about the state of competition
in the retail banking sector.
51. We examine the issue of price transparency, low
levels and perceived difficulties with switching as well as whether
the UK's free-banking system hinders competition in greater detail
in the following chapter.
LOW LEVELS OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
52. Effective competition should deliver good consumer
outcomes. The theme of low levels of customer satisfaction and
lack of choice reverberated through the course of our inquiry.
Which? has conducted satisfaction surveys of its members for savings,
current accounts and mortgage providers in 2008, 2009 and 2010.
As Which? noted, the results for these surveys have shown both
significant variation across different banks, with new entrant
or internet-only banks performing especially well, with continued
poor performance by the largest of the high-street banks. For
current accounts, their survey results found the main high street
banks performing poorly compared to internet banks and many of
the smaller or new entrant banks and building societies. Table
7 below summarises their results.
Table 7: Survey on satisfaction results for personal
current account brands
Bank
| 2008
| 2009
| 2010
|
Lloyds Banking Group (a)
| 59% | 55%
| 49% |
(HBoS) | 56%
| |
|
RBS (b) | 61%
| 57% | 55%
|
HSBC | 57%
| 60% | 58%
|
Barclays |
53% | 55%
| 53% |
Santander (c)
| 44% | 58%
| 52% |
Average 'Big 5' (excluding Santander for 2008)
| (57%) | 57%
| 53% |
Banks achieving 70% or greater satisfaction results
|
First Direct* | 85%
| 90% | 88%
|
Virgin One | -
| - | 88%
|
Co-operative bank | 82%
| 84% | 86%
|
Smile | 88%
| 91% | 85%
|
Nationwide | 79%
| 79% | 72%
|
First Trust | -
| - | 72%
|
Cahoot* | 82%
| 84% | 71%
|
Intelligent Finance* |
72% | 74%
| - |
Source: The 2010 Which? Current account survey,
Ev 194. Note: * = internet only brands operated by one of the
Big 5 banks
53. Which? told us that the main areas of dissatisfaction
were the level of interest payments or charges applied to accounts
followed by the provision of up to date information on rates and
charges. They said some of the Big 5 also performed poorly for
provision of internet and phone banking services and resolution
of problems whilst customers of the Big 5 were most satisfied
with the accuracy and timelines of statements and availability
of branches. They recorded similar results for savings and mortgages.
Whilst the average satisfaction score amongst the Big 5 for savings
accounts was only 47%, First Direct and Co-operative Bank were
the only brands to score 70% or higher. The worst performing bank
brands were Santander at 39%, followed by Cheltenham & Gloucester,
Bank of Scotland and Halifax (all operated by Lloyds Banking Group).
54. With respect to current account provision, Which?
recorded that the main areas of dissatisfaction were the level
of interest and keeping customer informed on rates and charges.
Customer satisfaction in the mortgage market was similar, with
the Big 5 scoring an average of 55% satisfaction compared to the
best result of 87% (First Direct). The main reported reason for
dissatisfaction was lenders failing to pro-actively inform customers
when more suitable or better mortgages were available.[53]
55. Which? concluded that "despite the Big 5
banks', at best, average satisfaction ratings they continue to
dominate the provision of key retail financial services, emerging
as clear winners of the financial crisis." The conclusion
they drew was
that a poor quality service for customers is
irrelevant to the growth of significant market power, a clear
sign that normal competition is failing.[54]
56. Metro Bank executives agreed. Vernon W Hill II,
Vice Chairman, Metro Bankwho was the founder of the US
bank Commerce Bankstressed that "the customer dissatisfaction
rates in Britain for banks are at levels I have never seen in
America" and that many survey results show British consumers
were "very dissatisfied with the British banking system."[55]
Mr Hill told us the net promoter score which measured the percentage
of a bank's customers who would recommend the bank to a friend
minus those who would not. Mr Hill told us that First Direct scored
+57%, but that Lloyds Banking Group had a dissatisfaction score
of -19% whilst Barclays scored -35%. He also told us that Santander
had a "dissatisfaction rate of 67%" and that overall
"in Britain 42% of customers are dissatisfied with their
banks."[56]
57. Mr Hill was scathing about the major banks, describing
them as "essentially offering the same products in the same
way" with the customer ending up with very little "choice".[57]
His colleague Anthony Thompson, Chairman, Metro Bank, explained
that, in contrast, Metro Bank saw themselves as "a retailer."
He explained that "the UK [non-banking] retail market was
highly competitive, so retailers are open from early in the morning
until late at night, they are open seven days a week." As
a result Metro Bank was "open from eight until eight Monday
to Friday, eight until six Saturday, eleven until four Sunday."
He contrasted this with the large banks which were "open
from nine until five" concluding that "if there was
a competitive market we would see changes in that."[58]
'Choice' was also stressed by Jayne-Anne Gadhia and Adam Phillips,
Chairman of the Financial Services Consumer Panel. Ms Gadhia told
us that:
as a member of the industry, that there are differences
between the current accounts offered by, for example, Santander
and Lloyds, but looking at it through a consumer's eyes, I think
it's quite difficult to understand what those differences really
are.[59]
Whilst Mr Phillips who described a "small number
of large banks" as "resembling an oligopoly," also
noted that the large banks had "prices that are very similar,
and deliver service that is very similar," concluding that
"therefore the consumer had no choice."[60]
58. Competition policy should maximise the benefit
to the consumer. Our evidence suggests that this is not happening.
The large banks perform poorly on many consumer satisfaction surveys
relative to other providers. Survey evidence consistently shows
customers are dissatisfied by service quality and the lack of
real choice on offer in the marketplace. In a genuinely competitive
market we would expect firms which provide superior service, choice
or prices to gain significant market share from rival firms, but
we see little evidence that this is happening.
LARGE SIZE AND ECONOMIES OF SCALE
59. Economies of scale are the cost advantages that
a business obtains due to expansion which cause a producer's average
cost per unit to fall as scale is increased. In retail banking
these include the need for a branch network, building a trusted
brand and access to capital. We received evidence that consumers
benefit from the presence of large banks and the accompanying
economies of scale. RBS asserted that "larger, more diversified
companies have the ability to achieve greater synergies and create
economies of scale. This enables banks to provide services at
lower cost to the consumer whilst also delivering a sustainable
return to investors."[61]
However, when pressed on this point, Stephen Hester explained
that he did not mean that big banks were the only model that should
exist, telling us that:
[...] an advantage of size, if it is size in
particular marketplaces, as opposed to size thinly spread everywhere,
can be those sorts of economies that allow you to offer customers
more. So that is an advantage. It doesn't mean to say there are
no disadvantages and it doesn't mean to say that if you're small
you can't come at it from different ways, but I do believe that
our scale, when properly configured and usedwhich it wasn't
in all cases before; we hope it will be in the futurecan
be an advantage to our customers and our shareholders, and we
try hard to do that by economies of scale.[62]
60. Vernon Hill was dismissive of the arguments deployed
by RBS and Mr Hesterhe told us that there was "no
proof that scale gets you economies of scale" going on to
say that:
Let us look at that statement: they fail, they
don't provide service and their cost is higher. There's no proof
in America that these large banks can deliver better service at
lower costin fact the reverse is true.[63]
John Fingleton considered that if a market was "not
particularly competitive" then "we would be very sceptical
that the incentives are there to exploit those efficiencies"
and that even where those efficiencies were exploited "the
incentives won't be there to pass them on to the customer."
He added that he had:
seen no evidence that suggests that you need
a 33% or a 30% market share to achieve minimum scale. There may
be evidence suggesting that below 5% or 10% of the market, it
may be difficult to have the sort of scale to deal with the IT
investment we've seen [...] So none of the evidence I've seen
suggests that the minimum efficient scale is at 25% or 30% of
the market. There might be some efficiencies about being able
to spread your IT investment over such a wide market share, but
it's not clear that it's of such a magnitude or that they would
be passed on to the consumers.[64]
61. The large banks have told us that ultimately
consumers will benefit from lower prices resulting from the economies
of scale and synergies provided by larger more diversified banks.
We agree that there are economies of scale/minimum efficient scale
in retail banking which will ultimately limit the total number
of firms in the market. However, we question whether the need
for economies of scale justifies banks having a 30% share of the
market or whether such benefits, if they exist, will be passed
onto consumers in a market where competition is deficient. Indeed,
such economies of scale benefits are likely to be outweighed by
the negative impact on competition by those providers who are
perceived to be 'too big to fail'.
13 OFT, Review of barriers to entry, expansion and
exit in retail banking, para 3.3-3.4, p25-26, November 2010 Back
14
A white label product or service is a product or service produced
by one company (the producer) that other companies (the marketers)
rebrand to make it appear as if they made it. Back
15
OFT, Review of barriers to entry, expansion and exit in retail
banking, figure 7.6, p146, November 2010 Back
16
Ibid. Back
17
Ev 199 Back
18
Ev 181 Back
19
The HHI is the sum of the squares of each provider's market share Back
20
CC, OFT, Merger Assessment Guidelines, September 2010 Back
21
OFT, Review of barriers to entry, expansion and exit in retail
banking, table 3.2, 3.6, p 35, 48, November 2010 Back
22
Data monitor, Banking on change: UK Current Accounts and Savings
in the UK 2010, 2010 Back
23
Competition in UK Banking: A Report to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, by Don Cruickshank, p 104, para 4.8, March 2000 Back
24
Competition in UK Banking: A Report to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, by Don Cruickshank, p 106, para 4.14, March 2000 Back
25
OFT, Review of barriers to entry, expansion and exit in retail
banking, p 35, para 3.23, November 2010 Back
26
Competition in UK Banking: A Report to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, by Don Cruickshank, p 115, chart 4.13, March 2000 Back
27
Ev w13 Back
28
Competition in UK Banking: A Report to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, by Don Cruickshank, p 120, para 4.48, March 2000 Back
29
Ibid. Back
30
Ev 177, Ev 215, Ev 221 Back
31
Ev 177 Back
32
Ev 177 Back
33
Q 844 Back
34
Q 187 Back
35
Q 201 Back
36
Q 201 Back
37
Q 187 Back
38
Q 320 Back
39
Ev 221 Back
40
Q 319 Back
41
Q 319 Back
42
Q 220 Back
43
Q 220 Back
44
Q 844 Back
45
Q 844 Back
46
Q 773 Back
47
Q 758 Back
48
Q 406 Back
49
Q 628 Back
50
Qq 41-43 Back
51
Q 70 Back
52
ICB, Issues Paper: Call for Evidence, para, 3.12, p 22 Back
53
Ev 194-195 Back
54
Ev 195 Back
55
Q 434 Back
56
Qq 436, 490 Back
57
Q 502 Back
58
Q 440 Back
59
Q 633 Back
60
Q 8 Back
61
Ev 215 Back
62
Q 316 Back
63
Q 458 Back
64
Q 781 Back
|