Tampering with voice recording

gettingolder_2

In reply to dunstonh - hopefully my recent replies have answered most of your questions. With the number of incoming questions and my responses there is a danger that the focus moves away from the original point of this post.
I believe it would be worth spending a modest amount for an initial analysis by a professional on the possible edits to the recording. I have analysed the recording with .wav editor and can clearly see and repeatedly replay the 2 sections where I am confident I mentioned the "non-GMP" component of the policy. In the first instance there is a click then a short silence and a definite discontinuity in the conversation. In the second instance there is a click - the call handler then coughs, then apologises another click and another discontinuity in the flow of the conversation. i.e. everything I believe I said at these 2 points has been edited out.

dunstonh

With the number of incoming questions and my responses there is a danger that the focus moves away from the original point of this post.

Now that we know that it is an insurance company and not occupational pension, we can look at it with that knowledge. Insurance companies are large and often unwieldy and pay out millions of pounds a year to solve disputes. There may be differences of opinions but that is inevitable.

There is the free of charge (to consumer) complaints process which gives access to the ombudsman if you still disagree with the outcome. The important thing is that errors do not entitle you to what was said. So, if one thing was said on the phone but realised later it was wrong, the insurer is not required to honour what was said. So, a person in the complaints department would not have any reason to get someone in the IT department to edit a conversation made by a different person. They could just admit the error on the phone call and pay you £25-£250 inconvenience money.

uk1

I'm not clear why any NDA is relevant to the help you are seeking here. No one is identifiable so there is no disclosure and therefore no breach of any agreement.

Good luck.

gettingolder_2

uk1 - my mention of the NDA was in response to ghifa who requested information about the earlier compensation agreement. I agree with you it is only its existence rather than any details about that are material to the current dispute.
My initial enquiries with a audio forensic expert revealed without prompting that a "cough" is often used to alter the recording. Exactly as has been used in this case.

gettingolder_2

In reply to laptop80 - the "clicks" in the recording are only small spikes that show up on the analysis of the frequency spectrum. They are barely audible if played at normal speed and volume. But I do agree with you that if they were doing a "professional" job these "clicks" should have been edited out before sending the audio file to me.

mania112

I don't think a professional firm edit out anything, therefore leaving the onus of editing out ... out.

uk1

gettingolder wrote: »

uk1 - my mention of the NDA was in response to ghifa who requested information about the earlier compensation agreement. I agree with you it is only its existence rather than any details about that are material to the current dispute.
My initial enquiries with a audio forensic expert revealed without prompting that a "cough" is often used to alter the recording. Exactly as has been used in this case.

Just ensure that your anger concerning the tape issue doesn't divert you from your core complaint. Leave that issue as a powder dry issue to follow through if the core issues are unresolved. It gives you a second bite at the issues.

GhIFA

gettingolder wrote: »

With the number of incoming questions and my responses there is a danger that the focus moves away from the original point of this post.

You may think it's not relevant, but it is - getting background information can indicate to us whether there is a genuine issue, or misunderstanding of what the provider can do without stepping into the realms of advice.

However, and please don't take this the wrong way as that is not the way it is intended, I do think you are getting a bit side-tracked with the "tampered recording" issue - you have set out your complaint to the provider, they have come back with a response that you are not happy with - given that you said they have apologised, I am assuming that you had formally submitted a complaint. This being the case, you should now refer to the Financial Ombudsman Service and let them look at it.

The complaint is around how they dealt with the transaction, it is not in whether they may have tampered with a recorded conversation (which I still believe to be unlikely), and spending money to have recordings analysed is, in my opinion a waste of money for what is likely to be a fruitless task. Even if it were to be the case, the basis of any remedial action the provider will be forced to take by the FOS will be focussed on the actual failings in how they dealt with the transaction, and not these recorded conversations.

Bear in mind as well that you only have 6 months after receiving a full response to your complaint to refer to the FOS - if you have already received this, time spent getting recordings analysed is eating into this 6 months.

To try and put it succintly - FOS will adjudicate on whether any failings occured in the way the provider dealt with your transfer, not on whether they may have tampered with recorded conversations afterwards - you already feel you have enough evidence to complain about their service so take this route. Don't get sidetracked by this tampering issue which makes very little difference to the main thrust of your complaint.

atush

If they are fined for tampering with a taped converstaion, it isn't you who would benefit from any fines applied.

So, as said, escalate your complaint to FOS, and leave the Conversation (and 's supposed faults) aside for now.

gettingolder_2

Thank you all for your input. I have decided to write one final letter to the pension company. I will have to mention the phone conversation because they had previously sent me a transcript which I challenged as being incomplete. I will diplomatically highlight the shortcomings at 2 points in the recording and offer them a suggested remedy. If there is any guilt on their part I am hoping this will lead to a swift resolution. Failing that I will pass it over to the ombudsman.