Complaints processes

samwardill

Three recently withdrew support for complaints logged via Resolver. They say it is to get complaints resolved more quickly. I think it is to make it harder to complain. They now only accept complaints by post (not freepost), phone or web chat. None of these methods are as convenient or robust as resolver. They have made this retrograde change with the agreement of Ofcom.

Takmon

samwardill wrote: »

Three recently withdrew support for complaints logged via Resolver. They say it is to get complaints resolved more quickly. I think it is to make it harder to complain. They now only accept complaints by post (not freepost), phone or web chat. None of these methods are as convenient or robust as resolver. They have made this retrograde change with the agreement of Ofcom.

I think this is a positive step forward and more companies should do this. Resolver is an unnecessary third party that simply use email templates to send a complaint.

Most complaints can be resolved quicker by using live chat or on the phone because you can get an instant response and they can ask questions to get the exact details of the complaint. If you do it via resolver it takes much longer because responses are done via email and there is a delay in responding from both sides.

samwardill

How can withdrawing support for one option to raise a complaint ever be a step forward?

I think you (and Ofcom) are confusing customer service and complaints. Customer service issues are better resolved by chat. Complaints are raised when customer service are unable to resolve issues and are necessarily more complex to resolve.

[Deleted User]

samwardill wrote: »

How can withdrawing support for one option to raise a complaint ever be a step forward?

I think you (and Ofcom) are confusing customer service and complaints. Customer service issues are better resolved by chat. Complaints are raised when customer service are unable to resolve issues and are necessarily more complex to resolve.

Which was (part of) @Takmon's point, why introduce a 3rd party to complicate matters either more?

They give you 3 separate points of access which is what they're obliged to do.

What's not convenient about post, phone or web chat? And how much does a 2nd class stamp cost nowadays? Personally if using the postal option for anyone I always use signed for anyway regardless if it's Freepost or not.

samwardill

Colin_Maybe wrote: »

Which was (part of) @Takmon's point, why introduce a 3rd party to complicate matters either more?

They give you 3 separate points of access which is what they're obliged to do.

What's not convenient about post, phone or web chat? And how much does a 2nd class stamp cost nowadays? Personally if using the postal option for anyone I always use signed for anyway regardless if it's Freepost or not.

Post is slow, environmentally unsound, expensive and has no record of receipt without extra expense. Phone and webchat are not suitable for complex complaints. By definition a complaint is complex. Anything less is customer service.

The third party offers a best practice free of charge service that provides a complete record of the complaint progress and history visible to both parties (and to ombudsman if required).

k3lvc

samwardill wrote: »

The third party offers a best practice free of charge service that provides a complete record of the complaint progress and history visible to both parties (and to ombudsman if required).

Seriously ?? As a business if I was in the habit of receiving any complaints I too would be rejecting anything received via a third party. If it's important enough to complain about it's important enough to be able to make the personal investment to ensure it's handled to your satisfaction.

Takmon

samwardill wrote: »

Post is slow, environmentally unsound, expensive and has no record of receipt without extra expense. Phone and webchat are not suitable for complex complaints. By definition a complaint is complex. Anything less is customer service.

The third party offers a best practice free of charge service that provides a complete record of the complaint progress and history visible to both parties (and to ombudsman if required).

A complaint does not have to be complex, a complaint is simply the customer expressing dissatisfaction to a business.

Phone and Webchat are suitable ways to start any complaint, this allows the customer to outline their complaint and because most complaints can be sorted easily it will allow the operator to do this immediately.
If the complaint is more involved then they can be escalated within company procedures to resolve it in the most efficient way. If documentation then needs to be sent in they can provide an electronic means to do this.

Resolver is just a basic email template that you fill out. This then goes into a mailbox waiting to be dealt with and then more time is wasted by them having to go back and forward with the customer to get all the required details which can be done instantly on the phone (such as passing security to access the account).
This process also does not follow the companies internal complaints procedure so is more work for the company to process and means it is slower to resolve the complaint.

samwardill

Takmon wrote: »

This process also does not follow the companies internal complaints procedure so is more work for the company to process

This is the real issue. Complaints raised by Resolver are easier for the customer to log and harder for the mobile phone company to process. Bingo, the mobile phone company has to spend less money processing complaints and has to log fewer complaints. No wonder mobile phone companies have lobbied Ofcom hard to be allowed to regard webchat as equivalent to more useful services like Resolver.

You don't happen to work in the mobile phone industry. Do you?

Takmon

samwardill wrote: »

This is the real issue. Complaints raised by Resolver are easier for the customer to log and harder for the mobile phone company to process. Bingo, the mobile phone company has to spend less money processing complaints and has to log fewer complaints. No wonder mobile phone companies have lobbied Ofcom hard to be allowed to regard webchat as equivalent to more useful services like Resolver.

You don't happen to work in the mobile phone industry. Do you?

I disagree, as a consumer, I find logging a complaint using Webchat or a Telephone call the quickest and easiest option.

When you initiate contact with the company using these methods you are able to quickly pass security and give them the details of your complaint. They can then ask additional questions to get any other information that they need for the complaint and either resolve it there and then or tell you how it will proceed.

When you use resolver you are filling out a template which is unlikely to have all the required information so you will have to go back and forward a few times to even log the complaint which takes a little while because its using email and not live communication like web chat or telephone. So you have to wait for the emails to be read and replied to each time and usually by a different person which interrupts the flow.

So I have no idea why you think resolver is good?

That's even without considering how email is not a secure method of communication and complaints often involve sensitive information (even just to pass security and identify yourself). So your risking that being intercepted by using it as well.

k3lvc

samwardill wrote: »

You don't happen to work in the mobile phone industry. Do you?

Now you lose any credibilty you may have had :rotfl:


If you want your complaint dealing with then complain in one of the 3 entirely reasonable ways they request

samwardill

Takmon wrote: »

I disagree, as a consumer, I find logging a complaint using Webchat or a Telephone call the quickest and easiest option.

I realise you may be a consumer as well, but do you work in the communications industry?