Buildings Insurance Claim - inconvenience...

No i don't thing she will reply as there is not a word in my statement that is not true.
Lower to Senior Management realize there is a fundamental problem and that yes maybe things originally were rushed though to get Asprea up and running.
As it stands there is not facility in place that highlights a claim that has come in that needs further works, if a dry certificate is required, if a Variation Order is required etc etc there is nothing in place to instruct the PCA this information has been received or still outstanding.
The first we learn of it is when the Customer calls up to inquire, due to the pressure being place on individuals in dealing with call after call it really is shambolic.
I could take an inbound call where a Customer requires me to follow up her claim and take ownership of it, by the time i have disconnected the call another one comes through, unless i am quick enough to make myself busy, this mostly leads to my Manager asking/demanding i stay on the phone to keep call percentages up about 95% which is the requirement that needs to be met as instructed by NU.
This then means that the Customer looses confidence in their PCA and the company and the cycle continues leaving the PCA to have to come up with some explanation to the Customer as to them not dealing with claim.
Unfortunately we do get recorded on all calls, i am more than sure that if most of the PCA were not, the call would go something like, my advice to you Mr/Mrs Customer is to get two local quotes and go for a cash settlement once the surveyor has been out, then to contact your Insurance Company for a cash settlement instruction.
When NU come into monitor the calls we take and listen into calls some how out Contractors find out and are on their best behavior agreeing to get this and that done in order to process the claim, but when gone they revert to their normal non co-operation. For Customers with a roof leak 9/10 times you are wasting your time making a claim as this will now be classed by the contractors as a 'non insured peril' if the Customer contests this then the Contractor is paid to go back out and low and behold the judgment is over turned it really is the most frustrating job in the world. so to all the PH that are having problems as a PCA i can only apologise for the service you receive but this really is out with our control.

That's quite a sorry tale. I've been in similar positions where those on the frontline who take all the flak know what's going wrong and what needs to be changed, but management carry on in their own sweet way. This part really stood out for me:

deputy1234567 wrote: »

There have been steps to sort this situation out by recruiting Call Handlers, who at best are given 3 days training before being thrown in at the deep, which portray a poor image of the company when a Customer calls to inquire about their situation and the call handler has not had adequate training for the situation, again this is down to a lack of guidance by Management.

My first job in insurance was telephone customer service. I got two weeks full-time training and in retrospect even this wasn't long enough. 3 days training for any role relating to claims is absolutely ridiculous.

deputy1234567 wrote: »

Insco - it is not a case of NU failing to treat their Customers fairly, they set up Asprea, most if not all Insurance Companies branch off to NU in one way or another, NU do not want to be seen to have failed with their birth of Asprea, there are faults on both sides of the aquasion unfortunately PCA's and Customers are stuck in the middle.
I have highlighted the internal working of Asprea in order to bring to light the work that is being done by the PCA's on a daily basis, on most days one PCA is reduced to tears due to frustration as well as the Irate Customer's frustration being taken out on them as the PCA has to tow the business line. I am not in the business of lying what i explain is the truth in order that things will change that infrastructures will change that processes will get better and that PCA'S will get recognition for the job they do in basically holding this company together.
Now, going to the FSA would be cutting off our noses to spite our face, i don't want to loose my job or anyone of my colleagues to loose theirs, whether that happens in the renewal of the contract being negotiated with NU i don't know.
If you were to ask anyone within Asprea the claim goes great from the start the booking is made the Customer is contacted and explained to about the whole process and who their point of contact is, until we get the report back from the Surveyor, collect the Excess and place the work order, we the PCA have ownership of the claim. After the Work Order is passed to the Contractor the problems start, again as explained these Contractors came with the original deal, it has plainly not worked having them on board as we are constantly fighting to get this work to a conclusion, there are faults on both sides and i accept that, as explained we do not have a process in place to chase Contractors or whether the Contractors require more information. materials, this as stated is a problem that Management should have addressed a long time ago. This is a good place to work believe it or not we just need the tools to do the job, Management need to sort this out and fast or sadly there will not be an Asprea.

" For Customers with a roof leak 9/10 times you are wasting your time making a claim as this will now be classed by the contractors as a 'non insured peril' if the Customer contests this then the Contractor is paid to go back out and low and behold the judgment is over turned " - that's really not treating the customer fairly is it???

If you informed the FSA, it might be that they could bring pressure on your management to make the changes that you clearly desperately need

deputy1234567 wrote: »

Ye maybe your right, we got told recently from NU that if a roofing claim is classed as a 'non insured peril' then this renders internal works null and void also, there was no notice given, we cam in on the Monday and were told this to pass on to Customers whether they had accidental cover or not.
Before what would happen is the Customer would be informed of the works they would need to carry out on their roofs before any internals works were completed which in most cases the Customer was disappointed but knew what they had to do to get the problem solved.
Again the PCA being on the front line have to carry the can.
We are stuck between a rock and a hard place yes?

It really is an impossible situation for you, and completely unacceptable in a supposedly regulated environment. The FSA should act if you report this to them. You could also consider the press?

Every case has to be considered individually - the cause of the damage needs to be considered in light of the applicable policy wording - for you to be simply dictated to by NU in the manner you have advised is quite shocking.

Yes i had thats why i was compelled to write to let Customers know of the plight of the PCA and that we are doing as much as we can with the resources we have at our disposal to accommodate the Customer but as you are seeing goal posts constantly being moved.
You will have notice recently if you have been calling that our 'please wait, your call is important to us' message has changed as well as the hold music to make the experience that more enjoyable, one full weekend spend being informed of this and the requirements sough by NU to help us gain an extension to the renewal of our contract. Am sure the money and time could have been put to better use in getting the structure of the business in order.
But i am just a lonely PCA paid to do a job and follow orders.