Counter Withdrawal Error

7sefton

I honestly don’t understand the moral objection here (although granted the post does sound a little odd).

Every single thing that isn’t perfect at any financial institution I deal with, I complain. Long wait to see the cashiers? Complained: £40 compensation. Mobile app down one morning? Complained: £50. Told incorrect info on the phone and have to go into branch to complete the query? Complained: £75.

I have 14 current accounts (like any good money saver maximising rewards and interest), so I can usually find something to complain about at least once a week. I just fill in an online form and usually expect at least £25 in my account within a few days. The banks always give money to resolve the complaint within 48 hours as they are mindful of their ombudsman statistics. I never lie - I just bother to complain about things that other people would just tolerate. In my mind it’s money I’m entitled to for them not living up to the high standards we should all expect from a bank, and I’m going them a favour by highlighting where their service isn’t good enough.

I’m expecting howls of derision, but I simply think you’re missing out!

mgdavid

7sefton wrote: »

I honestly don’t understand the moral objection here (although granted the post does sound a little odd).

Every single thing that isn’t perfect at any financial institution I deal with, I complain. Long wait to see the cashiers? Complained: £40 compensation. Mobile app down one morning? Complained: £50. Told incorrect info on the phone and have to go into branch to complete the query? Complained: £75.

I have 14 current accounts (like any good money saver maximising rewards and interest), so I can usually find something to complain about at least once a week. I just fill in an online form and usually expect at least £25 in my account within a few days. The banks always give money to resolve the complaint within 48 hours as they are mindful of their ombudsman statistics. I never lie - I just bother to complain about things that other people would just tolerate. In my mind it’s money I’m entitled to for them not living up to the high standards we should all expect from a bank, and I’m going them a favour by highlighting where their service isn’t good enough.

I’m expecting howls of derision, but I simply think you’re missing out!

IMO your moral compass is f....d.

Flobberchops

7sefton wrote: »

Every single thing that isn’t perfect at any financial institution I deal with, I complain.

You're aware banks are for-profit and your bank would be within its rights to make the commercial decision to decline to offer you banking facilities with no right to appeal (let alone complain)? I wouldn't be so eager to pluck the golden goose if I were you, but it's your decision.

[Deleted User]

7sefton wrote: »

I honestly don’t understand the moral objection here (although granted the post does sound a little odd).

Every single thing that isn’t perfect at any financial institution I deal with, I complain. Long wait to see the cashiers? Complained: £40 compensation. Mobile app down one morning? Complained: £50. Told incorrect info on the phone and have to go into branch to complete the query? Complained: £75.

I have 14 current accounts (like any good money saver maximising rewards and interest), so I can usually find something to complain about at least once a week. I just fill in an online form and usually expect at least £25 in my account within a few days. The banks always give money to resolve the complaint within 48 hours as they are mindful of their ombudsman statistics. I never lie - I just bother to complain about things that other people would just tolerate. In my mind it’s money I’m entitled to for them not living up to the high standards we should all expect from a bank, and I’m going them a favour by highlighting where their service isn’t good enough.

I’m expecting howls of derision, but I simply think you’re missing out!

Ladies and Gents - the human race of 2018.

This is not the way to go about things - complaining at least once a week for £25 is ridiculous.

MEM62

Le_Jardin wrote: »

Can I be compensated for the 2 days of stress worrying if I would get my money back?

Compensation is generally awarded for loss. Do you have a quantifiable financial loss?

It would also be difficult to hold the bank liable for your emotional reaction to the situation. We all deal with things in different ways and the bank could not have reasonably foreseen your reaction.

I accept that the bank made an error but, in your position, I would have also counted the money at the counter. Yep, the cashier messed up but you didn't check. Proper diligence from either of you would have prevented the issue.

Shared responsibility in my opinion.

eschaton

Le_Jardin wrote: »

Can I be compensated for the 2 days of stress worrying if I would get my money back?

Definitely, you deserve every penny for stress like that. Don't accept anything less than £1000.

7sefton

mgdavid wrote: »

IMO your moral compass is f....d.

Why?

Let’s take the wait to see a cashier. Banks are reducing staff which slows down counter service. I wait ten minutes to see the sole cashier, whereas previously they’d have had more staff available and I’d have been seen in half that fine. A tangible service deterioration that affects my day negatively.

The bank does not deliver the service I feel I deserve, so I complain.

The bank agrees with me - it doesn’t have to - and awards me £40. They also get the benefit of my feedback which they can use to improve their customer experience and retention.

Where’s the moral issue here?

Westie983

7sefton wrote: »

Why?

Let’s take the wait to see a cashier. Banks are reducing staff which slows down counter service. I wait ten minutes to see the sole cashier, whereas previously they’d have had more staff available and I’d have been seen in half that fine. A tangible service deterioration that affects my day negatively.

The bank does not deliver the service I feel I deserve, so I complain.

The bank agrees with me - it doesn’t have to - and awards me £40. They also get the benefit of my feedback which they can use to improve their customer experience and retention.

Where’s the moral issue here?

Sadly this wont mean more cashiers appear to serve you, They are focussing more on customer service and transactions that can be completed away from the counter.

Westie983

eskbanker

Westie983 wrote: »

Sadly this wont mean more cashiers appear to serve you, They are focussing more on customer service and transactions that can be completed away from the counter.

An interesting piece of logic to use that line of argument to justify delivering poor customer service!

I do get the rationale for reducing staff numbers and branches but dressing it up as an improvement in customer service is a particularly creative bit of spin, even though many of us are undoubtedly happy to serve ourselves online and rarely set foot in branches....

Westie983

Its not logic its what is happening, I don't agree with it, and its the bosses at the top of the chain that have never worked in a retail bank that have made these decisions. Its definitely have made my job harder being the lone cashier with customers who want to have a counter service but there is alternative ways they can transact on their accounts.

They have decided that the number of customers in a counter queue can be dealt with elsewhere in the bank and they can be on their way and thus not having to queue and their transaction is completed quicker and efficiently this improving customer service.

This is the idea and it wont go back to the days when I have someone to help with the queue or to help when that customer comes in with bags of coin and thus causes a queue behind them, or the customer who is scared to use the cashpoints and machines.

I cant say I agree with the changes, just doing what I can to help the customers I do see.