How Bcard perform quality checks on case handlers ? So always take your comp to FSA!

justanon

Barclays undertake two types of internal quality checks against cases :

1. QA and

2. QC.

QA is effectively an external measure of quality which is presented to the FCA.

QC in an internal check although I understand some MI is given to the FCA.

QA checks are only given to any case handler that are over 140% productive. So not surprsingly the vast majority of case handlers will never get a QA check.

QA and QC will either pass a case handler's work (assessed as a 'Green' or 'Amber' mark) or fail the case as a 'Red' mark.

With QC, if a case handler is assessed as a 'Red', they will then have to get 3 consecutive 'Greens' before they are moved of consecutive QC checks.

Sounds good don't it ? Now for the trick. Every case handler will get one QC check the same day every week. If they are then assessed as a 'Green' or 'Amber', they won't get checked again until the same day next week. So the 'savvy' case handler will then cherry pick their first case of the day of their check to ensure that it is an 'easy Green' QC pass. No more QC checks until next week, bigger performance bonus for lots of QC passes, etc.

The point of this note.......Don't trust B/card and always challenge any Defend decision by escalating to the FCA.

[Deleted User]

Why would anyone "escalate" a PPI complaint to the FCA? The free Ombudsman service (FOS) is there precisely for disputed complaints and the Bank's "internal quality checks" are largely irrelevant because no complainant will be able to present evidence that these have affected the outcome of their complaint.

roonaldo

The Food Standards Agency wont help!

Insider101

Quality checking is nothing new. Most financial services businesses do it and not just on PPI complaints. I don't see the logic in effectively saying "banks quality check so you should challenge every defend decision". If anything, quality checking means the decision is more likely to be fair and correct .

magpiecottage

The OP seems to think Barclays is regulated by the Food Standards Agency, which suggests (s)he does not know what (s)he are talking about.

The OP then says you should take your complaint to the FSA. Even if they meant the Financial Conduct Authority (the FCA), Barclays' currrent regulator, if they really had any understanding, they would know that it does not get involved in individual complaints.

I have NOT worked for Barclays, however, I have in the past done some work for a number of large institutions. The normal approach is nothing like what the OP suggests. Checks are generally made at random. You have no idea which file you have worked on will be picked up,

The regulator expects the business to show how it has a credible means of assess quality and this would almost certainly include ensuring those working on cases could not simply change their way of working for cases they knew were coming.

It also includes recording the uphold rates generally and those on cases which are checked. Any significant discrepancy would lead to further investigation.

roonaldo

I think the OP was getting at that the quality checking system is being flouted by case handlers, suggesting they are winging it for the rest of the week.

But this doesn't mean the decision it wrong just because it has not been quality checked, so a bit of a pointless thing to bring up. I know contract workers that that work there (in Northampton) and are good experienced complaint handlers and most likely to be making the correct decisions.

Judging by the OP's other posts he/she seem to have sour grapes, probably just been given the sack.

magpiecottage

A bit of an admission on his/her part then.

Perhaps (s)he thought that was they system, tried to play it and got caught.

As you say, the majority of complaint handlers are conscientious but it is a very difficult job. You are looking at whether the recommendation was valid, not whether it is the one you would personally have made in that situation.

This can lead to some very hard calls sometimes.

Checking a case involves, or should involve, seeing if the thought process of the handler matches the evidence. Only if it does not would should the checker think about overturning the decision - and that is far from automatic.

Checking should not simply redoing the assessment, though.

justanon

Sill employed at Barclays and I am a whistleblower. My previous posts still apply for M/Stanley, G/fish and core B/card as that is still the Barclay's process. I may have wrongly mentioned the FCA in a previous post but I know what I am talking about. Follow my advise as Barclays is not the Go-To bank and has many flawed processes. I am expecting the new CEO to change soon the poor 'Go-To' mantra and also change the Barclays behaviours of Honesty, Intregrity, etc.

societys_child

I may have wrongly mentioned the FCA in a previous post but I know what I am talking about

~18 months to correct and edit your original post, and think this reply up :huh:
Um, ok.

Happy new year btw.

[Deleted User]

justanon wrote: »

Sill employed at Barclays and I am a whistleblower.

Barclays are slow to act then…

dunstonh

Follow my advise as Barclays is not the Go-To bank

it's advice. not advise.