Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, August 3, 1995 TAG: 9508030043
SECTION: BUSINESS PAGE: B8 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: ASSOCIATED PRESS
DATELINE: NEW YORK LENGTH: Medium
Responding to complaints from the FBI and police, federal regulators are warning banks to fix broken security cameras and take stronger steps to deter robberies.
The complaints come as robberies have risen sharply over the past two decades despite modest declines recently. Nationwide, the number of robberies at bank offices has more than doubled in 20 years, to 8,578 in 1993 from 2,521 in 1973, according to the FBI.
There are more bank branches than 10 years ago. But law enforcement officials say the real problem is poor security, especially at small branches or community banks that lack guards, bulletproof glass and up-to-date security cameras.
``We've found that a lot of times the film doesn't turn out, or the camera just wasn't on,'' said Deborah Jones, an FBI spokeswoman in Chicago, where bank holdups have have jumped over the last three years.
Last month, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., a government agency that backs bank deposits, sent a warning to chief executives at 6,800 banks.
``In some cases, we are told, security programs and procedures ... have not been followed,'' the FDIC said ``In other cases, security devices apparently have failed to perform as designed due to lack of proper maintenance.''
The FDIC says most banks are complying with minimum federal requirements for security measures, but many have failed to take the extra steps that could prevent holdups.
The FDIC requires banks to have a vault for keeping cash, a lighting system around the vault, tamper-resistant locks for doors and windows, and an alarm system.
But the FDIC leaves it up to bank security directors to decide whether more sophisticated security tools, such as cameras, bulletproof glass and armed guards, should be employed, according to factors such as local crime rates.
The reason is that a bank in Nebraska may not need the same type of security systems as a bank in New York or Los Angeles.
Many banks take the extra precautions, but are not checking to make sure the cameras work properly. Others that should be installing additional safety devices in branches are not.
``We feel that some should have installed other devices,'' said Eugene Seitz, a review examiner for the FDIC's special activities division.
Seitz declined to comment on which banks have had problems or which local FBI or police departments have lodged complaints that banks aren't doing enough.
``It's scattered, we're getting complaints from here and there,'' said Seitz. ``I don't think it should be of great concern to consumers.''
Banks that violate the minimum regulations can be fined. Seitz said he was unaware of any such instances.
Better systems do work. In Southern California, considered by law enforcement officials to be the worst region for bank robberies, the FBI and police convinced bankers in 1993 to beef up security. As a result, robberies fell to 1,200 last year from an all-time high of 2,641 in 1992, the year of the Los Angeles riots.
Police and bankers say cost is one reason why banks don't use more security measures.
Security guards charge $25 to $45 an hour, and usually work in pairs. Bulletproof glass panels cost between $50,000 and $100,000.
``Many banks are willing to take their chances without security guards and they don't want the added expense,'' said Michael Connelly, a Chicago police sergeant. He said that a few downtown banks that were robbed this year had broken camera systems.
The city has already had 112 bank robberies so far this year, up from 91 in all of 1994 and 88 in 1993. Police are pressing banks to beef up security by hiring guards and putting up bullet proof glass.
Bank robberies cost the industry $65 million in 1993, according to John Hall, a spokesman for the American Bankers Association.
But in choosing security considerations, bankers have to weigh the expense of security systems against other factors, such as customer convenience and the cost of fighting other crime. Check fraud, for instance, cost the industry $815 million in 1993, he said.
by CNB