Workflow
银行开卡测评
icon
Search documents
光大银行开卡实测:办理时间最短,需添加客户经理微信
Nan Fang Du Shi Bao· 2025-08-23 08:08
近年来,为防范电信诈骗、洗钱等风险,银行开卡流程趋严,但部分网点"层层加码"或"一刀切"过度限 制交易额度等问题亦引发关注。 惠州情况如何?南都N视频记者实地走访惠州9家银行,以办理一类储蓄卡并开通网银为目标,从办事 效率、合规性、防诈执行、服务质量四大维度展开测评,体验银行办卡服务和流程是否合规,是否便 利,有没有存在"层层加码"现象。 结果显示,被测评银行在反诈宣传方面表现优异,9家银行网点工作人员在办理开卡业务时,均主动向 记者介绍防诈骗教育宣传。因把握风险防控与金融便民的尺度不一,9家银行中,7家为记者办理了不同 额度的一类卡,华夏银行惠州分行、兴业银行惠州分行分别以新用户办不了一类卡和只有业务相关的客 户才能办理一类卡为由,向记者表示只能办理二类卡。 成功办理一类卡的7家银行中,5家银行从取号到办理完成时间在30分钟以内,部分银行耗时50分钟。 测评网点:光大银行惠州分行 总耗时:约11分钟 总得分:95分 8月14日,记者前往光大银行惠州分行,办理一类储蓄卡,发现银行线上线下服务指引存在差异,全程 耗时约11分钟。 8月14日上午,记者致电中国光大银行惠州分行客服,咨询办理一类卡所需材料与流程。工 ...
珠海7家银行开卡测评:有人10分钟搞定,有人被卡1小时!
Nan Fang Du Shi Bao· 2025-07-02 13:26
Core Viewpoint - The evaluation of seven banks in Zhuhai revealed significant disparities in their card issuance processes, with some banks excelling in service quality while others faced criticism for excessive restrictions and inefficiencies [1][3][6]. Group 1: Evaluation Results - The evaluation showed a clear tiered scoring among the banks, with China Merchants Bank and Xiamen International Bank both achieving the highest score of 95, demonstrating effective risk management and customer service [6][16]. - The lowest score was 55, attributed to banks like China Everbright Bank and Shanghai Pudong Development Bank, which exhibited lengthy processes and excessive restrictions on transaction limits [7][12][16]. Group 2: Efficiency and Process - The time taken to open a bank account varied significantly, with the fastest being 10 minutes at Xiamen International Bank, while some banks took up to 64 minutes due to inefficient processes [11][12][13]. - The average waiting time and processing time for account opening were inconsistent across different banks, highlighting a lack of standardization in service efficiency [11][26]. Group 3: Compliance and Service Quality - Overall compliance performance was strong, with four banks receiving full marks for not engaging in bundling sales or requiring unnecessary app downloads [16][17]. - However, some banks, such as China Everbright Bank and China CITIC Bank, faced criticism for requiring customers to follow social media accounts or download apps, negatively impacting user experience [17][21][22]. Group 4: Transaction Limits - The initial transaction limits varied widely, with Xiamen International Bank allowing a limit of 50,000, while others like China CITIC Bank set limits as low as 1,000 [22][24]. - The inconsistency in transaction limits reflects the banks' varying interpretations of regulatory guidelines aimed at preventing fraud and money laundering [22][23][24]. Group 5: Documentation Requirements - The documentation required for account opening was not standardized, leading to confusion and delays as different banks requested varying levels of information [26][27][30]. - This lack of uniformity in documentation requirements contributed to a frustrating experience for customers, as they faced different expectations at each bank [26][30].