Capita taking the proverbial?

BrainDrained

Does anyone know a named individual I can complain to concerning an issue I have with Capita at Darlington, who administer the Royal Mail Pension Scheme?

Sorry this is a bit of a rant.

Long story short, my late husband was receiving a pension from the Royal Mail.  I am entitled to half of his pension as a surviving spouse.  Capita keep making stupid errors on any paperwork they send to me.  For example, the letter they sent me telling me about the exact amount of pension and the payment arrangements etc, was incorrectly addressed and delivered to a neighbour's house (despite earlier correspondence being sent to the correct address).  Not only did it have the wrong house number, but they also used my husband's surname, which is different to the one I use.  This was opened by the neighbour's young son, who did not recognise the name, and this resulted in private financial information being disclosed. I am still waiting for a response to the letter I have written about this.

In the meantime, I have just received a letter asking me to justify my surname, by sending them specific ID, some of which they have already had to support my claim for the surviving spouse's pension. They were told my surname right at the start, when I first notified them of his death.  Apparently this wasn't entered correctly into the database (or has since been changed by them).  I have asked them several times to correct the information, so this has been dragging on for months. I feel they are well and truly taking the p*** asking for some proof that I am not using my husband's surname.  

The Passport office and DVLA haven't had a problem with my not using my husband's surname, so why is Capita making such a big deal about it?   Under English law, I can call myself anything I want to as long as it is not done with fraudulent intent, and the name I am asking them to use is the same as on my bank account.  They haven't [yet] queried this, so why can't they use some common sense and just change it?. 

I feel like I am going round in circles with the "helpline" and email system and I really could do without all this hassle.  I hope a formal complaint might produce a better outcome.

dunstonh

The Passport office and DVLA haven't had a problem with my not using my husband's surname, so why is Capita making such a big deal about it?  

Neither DVLA or the passport office have to follow anti-money laundering guidelines.

In the meantime, I have just received a letter asking me to justify my surname,

I very much doubt they are asking you to justify your decision to use your preferred surname.   More likely they are asking for evidence to be sure you were married and you are who you say you are.

I feel like I am going round in circles with the "helpline" and email system and I really could do without all this hassle.  I hope a formal complaint might produce a better outcome.

Capita have an awful reputation, like most professional administrators and you appear to have issues that are worthy of a complaint.  So, make a complaint to their complaints team.    However, don't try and fight them on their requests to prove your surname.   They are making a fair and valid request on this.  If they are being inefficient and you are being difficult, then its just going to be a painful process.

BrainDrained

dunstonh sa

In the meantime, I have just received a letter asking me to justify my surname,

I very much doubt they are asking you to justify your decision to use your preferred surname.   More likely they are asking for evidence to be sure you were married and you are who you say you are.

[Snip]

No, the letter clearly states they are not going to change my surname without documentary proof.

I use my maiden name double barrelled with my husband's surname,  though not hyphenated.   I gave them this name when I first contacted them about the death, the pension is being paid into a bank account under that name, and they have already had copies of my birth and marriage certificates (which show my maiden name of course). Apparently the details were input with my maiden name in the field for a second name.  It should be a matter of common sense to see why I use both names, and it's not actually that unusual.  All I am asking for is a correction to something THEY have done.  

It seems that lack of common sense is a necessary prerequisite for employment with Capita.

Marcon

BrainDrained said:

I feel they are well and truly taking the p*** asking for some proof that I am not using my husband's surname.  

Not clear if you've actually sent them a copy of your passport or driving licence showing you are still using your maiden name. Doing that might solve the issue - digging your heels in (a stance I'd completely understand, given the frustration you are clearly enduring) won't.

This is an occupational pension scheme, so the trustees must have a formal complaints process known as the Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure. Ask for a copy of that if you have to pursue a complaint; don't bother with any informal procedure offered by Capita.

MallyGirl

It will be simpler to provide the documentation they ask for. That is not justifying your use of the name, it is allowing them to tick the right boxes in the Know Your Customer (KYC) and anti money laundering processes. If you have had your bank account for a while then you could have opened it under less stringent rules than we have today.

Bonavino

As a data breach occurred (i.e. a letter containing sensitive information sent to an incorrect address (with a potential incorrect surname)), an alternative to Marcon's suggested approach would be to raise an incident with Capita's Data Protection Officer. A simple google of Capita DPO will yield their email address. This formal process should ensure Surname and Address are stored as you would like throughout their internal systems and also, allow them to acquire whatever evidence they need from you.

eskbanker

BrainDrained said:

they also used my husband's surname, which is different to the one I use

[...]

I feel they are well and truly taking the p*** asking for some proof that I am not using my husband's surname.  

The Passport office and DVLA haven't had a problem with my not using my husband's surname

BrainDrained said:
I use my maiden name double barrelled with my husband's surname,  though not hyphenated.   I gave them this name when I first contacted them about the death, the pension is being paid into a bank account under that name, and they have already had copies of my birth and marriage certificates (which show my maiden name of course). Apparently the details were input with my maiden name in the field for a second name.  It should be a matter of common sense to see why I use both names, and it's not actually that unusual.

Just to clarify, are you saying that you use the name <FirstName(s)> <MaidenName> <Husband'sSurname> (no hyphen), have done all along, and intend to continue doing so?

If so, I can easily see why the lack of hyphenation might have resulted in the perception (however erroneous) that your surname is solely the last word, and why they may now be seeking some reasonably formal evidence (not justification) that you use both as your surname.

Marcon

MallyGirl said:

It will be simpler to provide the documentation they ask for. That is not justifying your use of the name, it is allowing them to tick the right boxes in the Know Your Customer (KYC) and anti money laundering processes. If you have had your bank account for a while then you could have opened it under less stringent rules than we have today.

Quite - and, in these days of mega scam problems, the processes are there to provide the customer with protection. Rather than railing against it, perhaps recognising it for what it is will lower OP's blood pressure!

BrainDrained

If this was a potential money-laundering or identity theft issue, they should have asked for proof of surname before making payments into a bank account that uses my correct surname, because this doesn't match what they have on file in their main database.

dunstonh

BrainDrained said:

If this was a potential money-laundering or identity theft issue, they should have asked for proof of surname before making payments into a bank account that uses my correct surname, because this doesn't match what they have on file in their main database.

Why do you think that?
When someone dies, the administrator has to tread the line between anti-money laundering rules, KYC rules and also treating the beneficiaries fairly.    It wouldn't go down too well if they said they were going to stop paying the money until everything is sorted.    So, there is a window (and amount) of tolerance to get these things resolved before they will decide to turn the income off pending completion of the required details.

Focus on the things that Capita are getting wrong and not on the things they need to do.

eskbanker

dunstonh said:
Focus on the things that Capita are getting wrong and not on the things they need to do.

Not sure I'm understanding what you're suggesting here, but would have thought it makes more sense for OP to focus on what needs to be done, rather than dwelling on perceived Capita shortcomings?