Research Note: More than reminders: Empowering pawnbroking staff for better customer outcomes

We examine the effectiveness of a behavioural intervention designed to increase surplus collection rates for pawnbroking customers.

Read the research note

Surpluses are funds owed when a pawned item sells for more than the loan amount. Despite existing processes to notify consumers of surpluses, our pawnbroking sector review in 2018 found that over £1 million in surpluses remained unclaimed annually. 

Using a novel behavioural design approach, in partnership with a firm, we developed two interventions to improve surplus collection rates. The first intervention, a new reminder letter for customers, doubled collection rates in 30 days. We report the full design process and results for the letter study in Occasional Paper 59

This research note describes and evaluates the second intervention, a store-side ‘flag’, which automatically notifies staff when a customer who is owed a surplus returns to a store.  

We found that the intervention increased surplus collection rates by nearly 44%. The store-side flag provides a strong example of a low-cost, scalable solution that supports improved customer outcomes and removes barriers to action. This research highlights the importance of proactive design in achieving better outcomes by influencing both customer and staff behaviours. 

Authors 

Paul Adams, Chris Burke, Alexandra Chesterfield, Lucy Hayes, Steven Human, Bhavini Parmar, Laura Smart, Anna Whicher. 

Disclaimer 

Research notes contribute to the work of the FCA by providing rigorous research results and stimulating debate. While they may not necessarily represent the position of the FCA, they are one source of evidence that the FCA may use while discharging its functions and to inform its views. The FCA endeavours to ensure that research outputs are correct, through checks including independent referee reports, but the nature of such research and choice of research methods is a matter for the authors using their expert judgement. To the extent that research notes contain any errors or omissions, they should be attributed to the individual authors, rather than to the FCA.