Tweet
Background
In England the government have a scheme whereby young people (approx. 16 to 18) can get some extra money if they stay in school. It's up to £30 depending on the income of their parents, with the money going directly to the young person for expenses etc. and it's reliant on attendance and punctuality. I think it's a great scheme actually, a little bit of relief for poor families, a little bit more freedom for the young people and a recognition that being a student is a bit more expensive that sitting around doing nothing (with books and travel and lunch to buy). Plus a real loss for those who just can't be bothered to turn up for classes.
It used to be administered by the local councils - now it's done centrally. There's a huge push to encourage people to claim it and unlike most benefits they really want more and more claimants ! So it's meant to be easy to apply for and all very customer friendly.
It is however slightly complicated because the young person has to make a claim, the parents have to supply seperate forms showing their income, and the colleges have to provide the information about enrollment, attendance etc. Having said all that we haven't seen many problems even though hundreds of the people we see have children claiming this.
I have 1 case regarding this - but it is still one of the worst messes I have ever seen.I am assisting the mother of the person claiming as all problems relate to her evidence of income :
1st attempt
Customer sent all her evidence to them.
They refused her claim because she had not given then X piece of evidence.
X does not exist.
X should not exist.
There is no way to make X exist in this case.
X is not required according to their own guidance.
Which is where we became involved.
We wrote to them for her - we explained the mistake they had made, and sent copies of the evidence she had previously provided and quoted their guidance at them to show this was all the needed.
They didn't respond. When I spoke to one of their people on the phone they said they couldn't respond because the claim had been closed and she would need to make a new claim. They agreed we were right. They were extremely critical of me for sending copies when they only accept originals and couldn't get their heads round the fact that they had previously had all the originals.
They also revealed that paper Y (a very formal government issued piece of paperwork) was "blank".
Paper Y in fact has very light text. When I'd copied it I had to turn up the photocopier, and it appears they hadn't scanned it. Quite why they'd assumed it was "blank" I cannot imagine - a blank Y would be the most perfect opportunity for fraud going, you cannot have a blank Y.
2nd attempt
We helped her send in a new claim "under protest", for which we supplied a covering letter explaining the complete impossibility of supplying X, and why the other paperwork including Y should be sufficient.
They got surreal.
They rejected her claim - stating "Please supply Y as we are unable to read Y on our system".
Apparently they had failed to scan it properly again. However this request was sent in the same envelope they returned the original of Y in ! They won't accept copies so it's a mystery what they wanted.
The customer attempted to sort it out over the phone, she was told there was a process by which cases are sent to be scanned by a human being rather than automatically and that this should have happened here. However they couldn't give any way to send the original back to the specific people needed...
The worst customer service rep I have ever had the misfortune to deal with.
Today I phoned. I feel a little bit sorry for the woman I dealt with because above all she appeared to just be stupid - which is not actually something a person sets out to be. However she very clearly was not capable of doing her job, and she did have a choice about how she reacted when challenged. I'd like to emphasise that being able to resolve problems like this is part of my job and I am much much better than average (because I do it more often) at explaining this kind of problem over the phone.
The call was picked up. I identified myself, my organisation, and the customer.
The phone was put down without explanation for over 1 minute during which time she was typing (presumably something relating to her last call as she hadn't yet taken the reference number for this case) while she muttered to herself. I couldn't hear what she was saying as she typed, I suspect it would have been interesting in a scary way.
She eventually picked the phone back up, apologised for the delay, and I had to identify myself again. This time she took the reference number.
She then said she couldn't speak to me - as only the young person could give authorisation on the account. I had to explain several times that we were phoning about the mother's information, and that the mother had been asked to contact them and given the number. I don't think I ever actually convinced her I just overwhelmed her because I'm calm and competent and hideously insistent when I'm making calls for work.
She then failed to take the mother's authorisation but did discuss the account with me. Doesn't hurt me but that's a serious failure (basically she broke the law).
So I try and explain the problem (Y didn't scan), and she starts reading the notes from the old case (saying X is needed). I don't particularly blame her for this as the case is genuinely confusing.
The problem is she also doesn't know the difference between X and Y, or what a tax year actually is, or the difference between documentation given at the end of a tax year and given in year. She cannot accept that a document given in December 08 is for the tax year 08/09.
Any attempt to explain does not work. Any attempt to get her to look only at the issue we've called in about fails. Unfortunately she does have just enough understanding to know that she is somehow failing and she starts to panic.
We spent over 10 minutes trying to get her to understand, to look at the last notes on the account, to actually listen to what we're asking. Nothing.
It is obvious that you could spend a day talking to her and she still wouldn't understand the problem so I requested a supervisor. It is a particularly complicated case and really given the mistakes they had made previously it would most appropriately be dealt with by a supervisor anyway.
So I ask for a supervisor she asks another completely mistake wrong question. Repeat and repeat and repeat.
As soon as I asked for a supervisor she also got defensive (and I was very careful to be neutral about it, and just say it was because of the complexity of the case etc. I do professionally often have to ring call centres and in most cases being nice works best - I am NOT a SC in these cicrumstances), so now her questions are also accusatory -
why did you send a blank Y, we didn't
why did you not send X, it doesn't exist
(my favourite) why didn't you send a covering letter with the new application - WE DID !
She's also now interupting me every time I try and speak.
So now she asks a question (or makes an application) and I just say "I'm sorry but I'd like to speak to a supervisor, I don't think discussing this further will help".
She does put me on hold and I guess tries to get a supervisor to take the call. Unfortunately I suspect that the supervisor required her to explain what the problem was and after 20 minutes on the phone she still doesn't have any understanding of what it is.
(There isn't any polite way I can think of to say "I wish to speak to your supervisor because you are apparently incapable of understanding the problem. I therefore cannot explain the problem to you for you to tell the supervisor").
She's now repeatedly calling me sir. When she does this she gets flustered but does not apologise. She also cannot remember that I am not the customer, and keeps referring to my documents and my income etc.
She is asking apparently random questions that are not relevant to the issue in the desperate attempt to be able to explain what's going on to the supervisor. I just keep asking for the supervisor (and no I'm not just repeating "supervisor" I'm going round and round explaining that questions aren't relevant, that she's already asked that and been answered, that we're not getting anywhere - and "can you please transfer the call to a supervisor"). She's trying to put me off by saying I'd have to wait on hold - not a problem!
She then starts to interupt me every time I speak. When I ask (still politely) for a supervisor she says I'm being rude. Then she goes back to interupting me everytime I speak and now completely ignoring when I ask for the supervisor.
Eventually I end up saying "I have asked to speak to a supervisor. I need to speak to the supervisor. While it was not originally my intention I now feel that I will need to make a complaint about you".
She said she was transferring me then cut the call.
So I phoned back, spoke to someone competent and got passed through to the supervisor and I did make a complaint. If she hadn't put the phone down on me I'd have made a very mild semi-complaint (I really just wanted to get her out of the terrible loop!), but after that I asked them to review the call.
Ending
The supervisor gave us a contact to send Y to for hand scanning - but also told us off (politely) for making a new claim as apparently that wasn't necessary.
I have spoken to 4 people there and 3 were competent, polite, etc. The customer had talked to a handful more - she was very angry about the conflicting information but none of the individual calls had been like that. I just cannot understand how one person in a call centre can be that bad. It didn't seem to be a mood thing, maybe she was newer but she didn't seem capable of understanding basic information. I spend my life explaining complex things to people who don't understand the systems etc. - this woman just didn't seem capable of taking in the information. Like when we take volunteers and trainees - you can have people starting out with very little skill and knowledge and end up with excellent people sometimes, but some people just have no potential to do it (obviously they may be good at other things!).
Victoria J
In England the government have a scheme whereby young people (approx. 16 to 18) can get some extra money if they stay in school. It's up to £30 depending on the income of their parents, with the money going directly to the young person for expenses etc. and it's reliant on attendance and punctuality. I think it's a great scheme actually, a little bit of relief for poor families, a little bit more freedom for the young people and a recognition that being a student is a bit more expensive that sitting around doing nothing (with books and travel and lunch to buy). Plus a real loss for those who just can't be bothered to turn up for classes.
It used to be administered by the local councils - now it's done centrally. There's a huge push to encourage people to claim it and unlike most benefits they really want more and more claimants ! So it's meant to be easy to apply for and all very customer friendly.
It is however slightly complicated because the young person has to make a claim, the parents have to supply seperate forms showing their income, and the colleges have to provide the information about enrollment, attendance etc. Having said all that we haven't seen many problems even though hundreds of the people we see have children claiming this.
I have 1 case regarding this - but it is still one of the worst messes I have ever seen.I am assisting the mother of the person claiming as all problems relate to her evidence of income :
1st attempt
Customer sent all her evidence to them.
They refused her claim because she had not given then X piece of evidence.
X does not exist.
X should not exist.
There is no way to make X exist in this case.
X is not required according to their own guidance.
Which is where we became involved.
We wrote to them for her - we explained the mistake they had made, and sent copies of the evidence she had previously provided and quoted their guidance at them to show this was all the needed.
They didn't respond. When I spoke to one of their people on the phone they said they couldn't respond because the claim had been closed and she would need to make a new claim. They agreed we were right. They were extremely critical of me for sending copies when they only accept originals and couldn't get their heads round the fact that they had previously had all the originals.
They also revealed that paper Y (a very formal government issued piece of paperwork) was "blank".
Paper Y in fact has very light text. When I'd copied it I had to turn up the photocopier, and it appears they hadn't scanned it. Quite why they'd assumed it was "blank" I cannot imagine - a blank Y would be the most perfect opportunity for fraud going, you cannot have a blank Y.
2nd attempt
We helped her send in a new claim "under protest", for which we supplied a covering letter explaining the complete impossibility of supplying X, and why the other paperwork including Y should be sufficient.
They got surreal.
They rejected her claim - stating "Please supply Y as we are unable to read Y on our system".
Apparently they had failed to scan it properly again. However this request was sent in the same envelope they returned the original of Y in ! They won't accept copies so it's a mystery what they wanted.
The customer attempted to sort it out over the phone, she was told there was a process by which cases are sent to be scanned by a human being rather than automatically and that this should have happened here. However they couldn't give any way to send the original back to the specific people needed...
The worst customer service rep I have ever had the misfortune to deal with.
Today I phoned. I feel a little bit sorry for the woman I dealt with because above all she appeared to just be stupid - which is not actually something a person sets out to be. However she very clearly was not capable of doing her job, and she did have a choice about how she reacted when challenged. I'd like to emphasise that being able to resolve problems like this is part of my job and I am much much better than average (because I do it more often) at explaining this kind of problem over the phone.
The call was picked up. I identified myself, my organisation, and the customer.
The phone was put down without explanation for over 1 minute during which time she was typing (presumably something relating to her last call as she hadn't yet taken the reference number for this case) while she muttered to herself. I couldn't hear what she was saying as she typed, I suspect it would have been interesting in a scary way.
She eventually picked the phone back up, apologised for the delay, and I had to identify myself again. This time she took the reference number.
She then said she couldn't speak to me - as only the young person could give authorisation on the account. I had to explain several times that we were phoning about the mother's information, and that the mother had been asked to contact them and given the number. I don't think I ever actually convinced her I just overwhelmed her because I'm calm and competent and hideously insistent when I'm making calls for work.
She then failed to take the mother's authorisation but did discuss the account with me. Doesn't hurt me but that's a serious failure (basically she broke the law).
So I try and explain the problem (Y didn't scan), and she starts reading the notes from the old case (saying X is needed). I don't particularly blame her for this as the case is genuinely confusing.
The problem is she also doesn't know the difference between X and Y, or what a tax year actually is, or the difference between documentation given at the end of a tax year and given in year. She cannot accept that a document given in December 08 is for the tax year 08/09.
Any attempt to explain does not work. Any attempt to get her to look only at the issue we've called in about fails. Unfortunately she does have just enough understanding to know that she is somehow failing and she starts to panic.
We spent over 10 minutes trying to get her to understand, to look at the last notes on the account, to actually listen to what we're asking. Nothing.
It is obvious that you could spend a day talking to her and she still wouldn't understand the problem so I requested a supervisor. It is a particularly complicated case and really given the mistakes they had made previously it would most appropriately be dealt with by a supervisor anyway.
So I ask for a supervisor she asks another completely mistake wrong question. Repeat and repeat and repeat.
As soon as I asked for a supervisor she also got defensive (and I was very careful to be neutral about it, and just say it was because of the complexity of the case etc. I do professionally often have to ring call centres and in most cases being nice works best - I am NOT a SC in these cicrumstances), so now her questions are also accusatory -
why did you send a blank Y, we didn't
why did you not send X, it doesn't exist
(my favourite) why didn't you send a covering letter with the new application - WE DID !
She's also now interupting me every time I try and speak.
So now she asks a question (or makes an application) and I just say "I'm sorry but I'd like to speak to a supervisor, I don't think discussing this further will help".
She does put me on hold and I guess tries to get a supervisor to take the call. Unfortunately I suspect that the supervisor required her to explain what the problem was and after 20 minutes on the phone she still doesn't have any understanding of what it is.
(There isn't any polite way I can think of to say "I wish to speak to your supervisor because you are apparently incapable of understanding the problem. I therefore cannot explain the problem to you for you to tell the supervisor").
She's now repeatedly calling me sir. When she does this she gets flustered but does not apologise. She also cannot remember that I am not the customer, and keeps referring to my documents and my income etc.
She is asking apparently random questions that are not relevant to the issue in the desperate attempt to be able to explain what's going on to the supervisor. I just keep asking for the supervisor (and no I'm not just repeating "supervisor" I'm going round and round explaining that questions aren't relevant, that she's already asked that and been answered, that we're not getting anywhere - and "can you please transfer the call to a supervisor"). She's trying to put me off by saying I'd have to wait on hold - not a problem!
She then starts to interupt me every time I speak. When I ask (still politely) for a supervisor she says I'm being rude. Then she goes back to interupting me everytime I speak and now completely ignoring when I ask for the supervisor.
Eventually I end up saying "I have asked to speak to a supervisor. I need to speak to the supervisor. While it was not originally my intention I now feel that I will need to make a complaint about you".
She said she was transferring me then cut the call.
So I phoned back, spoke to someone competent and got passed through to the supervisor and I did make a complaint. If she hadn't put the phone down on me I'd have made a very mild semi-complaint (I really just wanted to get her out of the terrible loop!), but after that I asked them to review the call.
Ending
The supervisor gave us a contact to send Y to for hand scanning - but also told us off (politely) for making a new claim as apparently that wasn't necessary.
I have spoken to 4 people there and 3 were competent, polite, etc. The customer had talked to a handful more - she was very angry about the conflicting information but none of the individual calls had been like that. I just cannot understand how one person in a call centre can be that bad. It didn't seem to be a mood thing, maybe she was newer but she didn't seem capable of understanding basic information. I spend my life explaining complex things to people who don't understand the systems etc. - this woman just didn't seem capable of taking in the information. Like when we take volunteers and trainees - you can have people starting out with very little skill and knowledge and end up with excellent people sometimes, but some people just have no potential to do it (obviously they may be good at other things!).
Victoria J
Comment