General Purposes Sub-Committee: June 11th 1928
On Minute No 1217 (Branch facilities - area, Selly Park, Stirchley and Cotteridge) the General Manager presented the following report:
Report on Branches in the Selly Park, Stirchley and Cotteridge Area.
The fact that the Selly Park premises will be shortly available as a Daily Bank caused me to draw attention, in my annual report in January last, to the question of banking facilities for this particular area.
In order that the Committee may appreciate the position in this area, I have had the accounts at our Stirchley Branch dissected to show the number which might be regarded as Selly Park accounts, the number which might be regarded as Stirchley accounts, and the number which might be regarded as Cotteridge accounts. The boundaries taken for the purpose of this dissection of accounts are shown on the map herewith, and in the area from Selly Park there are already 792 accounts at Stirchley Branch. In the area which may be regarded as Stirchley proper there are 1,748 accounts, and in the Cotteridge area there are 1,320.
In considering the possibilities of development of these areas regard should be had to the population, and a rough estimate taken from the records of the Public Health Department show that there are 6,600 people in the Selly Park area, 9,600 in the Stirchley area, and 10,000 in the Cotteridge area, but at Cotteridge there is a population in what may be termed adjacent areas of 12,000, and 3,500 in adjacent areas at Selly Park.
The Stirchley Branch was decided upon at the instance of Councillor Fryer, who, as a Member of the Bank Committee, was convinced that we should do well to establish a Bank there. My own view at the time was that we should have a Branch at Selly Park, and another one at Cotteridge, leaving Stirchley out of the question, but ultimately the Committee followed the lead of Councillor Fryer. Two premises were bought at Stirchley for the sum of £2,750 freehold, but possession could only be obtained of one shop and house, and certain alterations were made to the premises at a cost of £910, the alterations forming part of a general scheme when possession could be obtained of the adjoining shop and house. Possession of these last named premises entirely depends on the Rent Restriction Act, and although approached on the matter of giving possession, the present tenant is not willing to leave. The premises are totally inadequate, and business is being conducted under serious disadvantages and at considerable risk. There is no strong room, and provision cannot be made for one.
In considering this question, regard must be had to the fact that a Branch exists at Bournville Works, and no doubt a good number of Stirchley people are depositors in that particular Branch. There is also an Evening Branch at Kings Norton, the front room of a house on The Green being used for the purpose.
There would appear to be two ways in which this area could be satisfactorily dealt with:
1. To have a Daily Bank at Selly Park, for which purpose the present buildings have been erected, and to obtain premises at Cotteridge. The Branch at Kings Norton could be transferred to Cotteridge, and the depositorship at Stirchley divided between Selly Park and Cotteridge.
The premises at Stirchley could then be disposed of for the best price obtainable, but we are not likely to obtain now the full amount we paid for the premises, as we bought at a time when prices were higher than they are to-day.
2. To have a Daily Branch at Selly Park, for which the present
buildings have been erected.
To utilise the present Stirchley premises as an alternate Daily Branch, and suitably enlarge same when possession can be obtained.
To obtain premises at Cotteridge and establish an alternate Daily Branch.
The present Kings
Norton Branch could be merged into the alternate Daily Branch at Cotteridge.
The advantage of alternate Daily Branches would be that the same staff could work two Daily Branches; but the disadvantages are that disappointment would be caused as a result of depositors attending at a Branch on the wrong day of opening. The fact that this trouble was experienced in 1919 led to the Committee abandoning alternate Daily Branches in Saltley, Duddeston, Ladywood and Bearwood.
Having regard to the expenditure involved in the Selly Park buildings, we could scarcely allow these premises to be opened on alternate days only, particularly as Barclays Bank will undoubtedly be opened each day.
Although I dislike alternate Daily Branches, I am convinced that a case cannot be made for three Daily Branches in this area, and there is just a possibility that we might lose considerably from Stirchley depositors if we entirely abandoned the Branch in that area, it would be a little risky to abandon it.
Councillors Poole and Gelling have visited the Stirchley Branch with me, and have toured the Cotteridge, Stirchley and Selly Park districts, and they will be in a position to speak as to the risk which we are carrying under present conditions.
The decision of the Committee is desired on this important matter.
1275 RESOLVED:- That the foregoing report of the General Manager be approved; that arrangements be made for the new Selly Park Branch to be opened as a daily branch; and that consideration of the question of establishing a new branch at Cotteridge be deferred until the effect has been ascertained of the new Selly Park Branch upon the Stirchley Branch, but that the General Manager be directed in the meantime to make enquiries in the Cotteridge area for a suitable site or premises.
Bank Committee: June 18th 1928
3128 The following report of the General Purposes Sub-Committee was presented:
Branch facilities in the Selly Park, Stirchley, and Cotteridge Area.
Your Sub-Committee have given careful consideration to the question of the establishment of branches for this area, which is at present served by the Stirchley Branch where the accommodation is very inadequate and unsatisfactory and also by an evening branch at Kings Norton which is open on Friday evenings.
The Selly Park premises at the corner of Pershore Road and Dogpool Lane will shortly be ready for opening as a daily branch bank which will serve the needs of the Selly Park District, but as the existing Stirchley Branch does not adequately cater for the Cotteridge area your Sub-Committee have considered whether it would be desirable to establish a branch at Cotteridge into which the present Kings Norton Branch could be merged and in this event whether the branch at Stirchley should be continued. Your Sub-Committee have deferred making any definite recommendations until experience has been gained of the effect of the new Selly Park Branch upon Stirchley Branch, both of which will be run for the time being as daily branches. The General Manager will bear in mind the desirability of acquiring suitable premises at Cotteridge and will draw attention to any likely opportunity which may arise of securing premises in that area.
3132 RESOLVED:- That the report of the General Purposes Sub-Committee be approved.
General Purposes Sub-Committee: October 8th 1928
On Minute No 1301 (Painting of Branch Premises), the General Manager reported that arrangements had been made and tenders accepted as follows:
Harborne Branch J
H Simmons £38. 12. 6. Selly Oak " Morgan & Colton £22. 0. 0. Stirchley " " " £46. 10. 0.
1311 RESOLVED:- That the action above referred to be confirmed and that this Sub-Committee hereby record their appreciation of the valuable assistance rendered by Mr Councillor Spragg in connection with the drawing-up of the specification for the painting work.
General Purposes Sub-Committee: December 10th 1928
On Minute No 1320, the General Manager presented the following report with regard to the available use of land and buildings purchased for branch bank purposes:
General Purposes Sub-Committee: June 10th 1929
The Sub-Committee were informed that the tenant of No 1505 Pershore Road had asked whether the Bank were willing to grant a lease of the premises tenanted by him.
1419 RESOLVED:- That the tenant of No 1505 Pershore Road be informed that the Bank cannot accede to the application for the granting of a lease of the premises.
Bank Committee: June 17th 1929
The Committee were informed that the tenant of the shop and house No 1505 Pershore Road, Stirchley, (premises owned by the Bank adjacent to the Stirchley Branch) had signified that he was prepared to negotiate terms for vacating the premises, as the Bank Committee were not willing to renew his lease.
The Committee were reminded that in 1923 the Lessee had been offered an amount of £100 as compensation in consideration of his vacating the premises in question, but had declined this offer.
After consideration it was:
3483 RESOLVED:- That the General Manager be instructed to direct Mr Frank Wilde to endeavour to arrange for the vacating of the premises Nod 1505 Pershore Road, Stirchley, by the Lessee in consideration of the payment of a sum for compensation of not exceeding £100.
General Purposes Sub-Committee: October 14th 1929
The Sub-Committee were informed of Mr Wilde's action in negotiating with the tenant of No 1505, Pershore Road, Stirchley, for obtaining vacant possession of the premises; the sum of £75 in respect of compensation, plus £3. 3. 0. costs, having been ultimately agreed in consideration of vacant possession being given on the 9th December next.
1445 RESOLVED:- That the General Committee be recommended to confirm the action taken in the matter, and that the General Manager take steps for the enlargement of the present Stirchley Branch by taking in the premises referred to above.
Bank Committee: October 21st 1929
3519 The following report of the General Purposes Sub-Committee was presented:
Possession of No 1505, Pershore Road, Stirchley.
By Minute No 3485, Mr Wilde was authorised to negotiate with the tenant of No 1505, Pershore Road, Stirchley, for vacant possession of the premises and to offer a sum not exceeding £100 in this connection. Mr Wilde has been successful in settling the matter at a sum of £75, plus £3. 3. 0. costs, in consideration of vacant possession being given on the 9th December next. Your Committee are asked to approve this arrangement and to direct that steps be taken to obtain tenders for the enlargement of the Stirchley Branch by taking in the premises above mentioned.
3626 RESOLVED:- That the payment of the sum of £75, plus £3. 3. 0. costs, as compensation to the tenant of No 1505, Pershore Road, Stirchley, in consideration of vacant possession of the premises being given on the 9th December next, be approved, and Minute No 3483 discharged, and that the General Manager be instructed to obtain tenders for the enlargement of the Stirchley Branch by taking in the premises in question.
Bank Committee: November 11th 1929
The Committee considered the question of the extension of the Stirchley Branch premises, and it was:
3566 RESOLVED:- That Mr Twist, Architect, be invited to submit plans and proposals for the extension of the Stirchley Branch.
General Purposes Sub-Committee: December 9th 1929
On Minute No 1445 (enlargement of Stirchley Branch), Mr W Norman Twist, Architect, appeared before the Sub-Committee and submitted scheme and plans for the required enlargement of this Branch, at an estimated cost of £1,100. It was:
1470 RESOLVED:- That the above-mentioned scheme and plans be approved; and that the General Manager, in consultation with the Architect, be instructed to invite tenders from selected contractors for the carrying out of the work.
General Purposes Sub-Committee: February 10th 1930
On Minutes Nos 1445 and 1470, the General Manager reported that the following tenders had been received for the enlargement of the Stirchley Branch premises:
Name Time (months) Amount
of Tender (£) Geo Webb & Son, Ltd - 1580 B Whitehouse & Sons 6 1450 Geo Mobbs 5 1397 J Broomfield & Son - 1595 Lewis Gorton 4½ 1500 C Bryant
& Son Ltd 4½ 1469
The tenders in question had been considered by the Chairman of the General Committee, who recommended that the tender of Mr George Mobbs at the sum of £1,397 be accepted.
1494 RESOLVED:- That the General Committee be recommended to accept the tender of Mr George Mobbs, and that the Town Clerk be instructed to prepare and seal the necessary contract.
Bank Committee: April 28th 1930
On Minute 3669 (alterations at Stirchley Branch), the Town Clerk presented the following report as to the completion of the contract:
April 26th 1930
I have to report that the following Contract is now duly completed:
Minute No:
3669
Contractor: G Mobbs
Particulars: Carrying out alterations and additions at Stirchley branch
3733 RESOLVED:- That Minute No 3669 be discharged.
Finance Sub-Committee: June 2nd 1930
The General Manager reported that in connection with the alterations being carried out at the Aston and Stirchley Branches it was necessary to change the position of the counters and to make provision for lengthening the same.
450 RESOLVED:- That the General Manager be instructed to arrange for the provision of a new counter at the Aston Branch and to utilise the material of the old counter for extending the counter at the Stirchley Branch.
Finance Sub-Committee: October 12th 1931
The General Manager reported that the Stirchley flat had been vacated as from the 25th September, and Mr Wilde had been instructed to endeavour to secure a suitable tenant, which action was confirmed.
December 14th 1931: Finance Sub-Committee:
603 On Minute No 589 (Flat, Stirchley Branch), the General Manager reported that Mr Wilde was continuing his enquiries and the Minute was discharged until he was in a position to report.
Finance Sub-Committee: March 14th 1932
The Sub-Committee were informed that the tenant of the Stirchley Flat, PC John Tudor, who had recently given notice terminating his tenancy, had at his own request been allowed to remain subject to one month's notice, but had now vacated the premises. He had, however, declined to pay a portion of the rent due from him and the Chairman had authorised the Town Clerk to take the necessary action to recover this amount.
646 RESOLVED:- That the action taken by the Chairman in giving authority to the Town Clerk, be approved, but that before definite action is taken, the circumstances be reported to the Chief Constable.
The Sub-Committee considered the application of Mrs Martin (née Davis) of 2 Charleville Road, Handsworth, for the tenancy of the Stirchley Branch flat, and after consideration, it was:
652 RESOLVED:- That arrangements be made to let the premises at the Stirchley Branch to Mrs Martin for a period of three years at a rental of £40 per annum, plus rates and cost of interior repairs, and that the General Committee be recommended to instruct the Town Clerk to prepare the necessary document.
Bank Committee: March 21st 1932
4379 On presentation of the report of Finance Sub-Committee
the General Manager reported that Mrs Martin had withdrawn her application for the tenancy of the flat at the Stirchley Branch and
this being the only matter dealt with in the report, the same was withdrawn.