Banks and Travelers: What Sends Customers Packing
If you have a set of security policies in place that might lead to someone being cut off from their cash at an inopportune time or for an undue duration, why don't you have some policies in place to help your customers cope with the results? Sure, banks have regulations to meet that protect privacy and prevent fraud. But their principal reason to exist is supposed to be to serve the customer.
Travel always seems to elicit great customer service stories -- that is, great stories from my perspective as a person who writes about CRM; not great as in "my experience while traveling was wonderful, stress-free and restored my faith in humanity."
As fodder for columns, they're great. They're object lessons in how to sabotage customer relationships, because these service failures take what was supposed to be a relaxing time and make it exactly the opposite. They leave people high and dry thousands of miles from home. And they expose the deeply rooted service problems that could be solved if businesses bothered to think like customers once in a while. I get to hear many of them. The latest came from a traveler who has asked not to be identified regarding a trip to the United Kingdom.
From Bad to Worse
This traveler arrived in London and withdrew some cash before leaving the airport -- at which point, unbeknownst to the traveler, the bank swung into action on her behalf and froze her ATM card.
This was beyond the call of duty for the bank, since the traveler had called the bank before departing to inform it that her card might be used in Europe during a certain time period. The bank still canceled the card. You're welcome, gentle traveler!
Luckily, a fellow traveler was able to front the cash for the trip, and credit cards still worked. On the way home, the traveler called the bank from the airport in Newark and tried to figure out what had gone wrong.
The bank's explanation was not particularly satisfactory, needless to say, although the agent on the phone was very apologetic. The bank had indeed canceled the card, so the traveler wouldn't be able to get any cash until the replacement card arrived. The shipment of the card would be expedited, the agent said -- it would be there in two business days.
Four business days later, the card arrived -- that was three weeks after the original was switched off. When the traveler tried to use it, the ATM at the bank still spit it back and provided no cash -- the PINhad changed.
At this point, the traveler was starting to seethe. Checking online revealed no reasont the card wouldn't work -- but it did reveal that the bank had charged the traveler US$35 to expedite the new card to replace the old one the bank had mistakenly switched off -- something the traveler had never been told.
Another call found another friendly agent who again was ever so apologetic. He said the new PIN was sent separately and should arrive in two business days. By now, the traveler was incensed: A $35 charge had been levied for a card that arrived via FedEx while its PIN was still meandering through bulk-rate mail channels. Not only was the fee not authorized, it was meaningless -- and it was still impossible to get cash out of the bank.
This sent the traveler over the edge and the agent -- who, again, apologized profusely -- was subjected to unshirted hell via the telephone. Sadly, there was no way the agent could do anything for the traveler -- security policies meant to protect the customer prevented it. The agent couldn't even reverse the $35 fee. The traveler soon had a new bank.
Injuries and Insults
What went wrong here? A couple of obvious things. First was that the bank failed to accommodate the customer's call providing it with information about the account (i.e., that it would likely be used in Europe during certain days). That oversight set the whole rest of this comedy of errors into motion.
Next came the switching off of the card without any contact to the customer. These days, most customers can be reached quickly via text or at least email. Instead of double-checking with the customer, the bank flipped the switch on the card -- leaving the traveler both without cash and without a reason for the card not working.
Next came the failure of the bank to honor its promises. If a customer says they'll get something as important as an ATM card in two business days, it needs to get there in two business days. Further, if the bank makes a mistake, it's the bank's job to fix the problem; the $35 fee is an insulting way of suggesting this is all the customer's fault.
To assess that charge and then fail to get the card to the customer on time is embarrassing; the fact that the PIN went via regular mail and thus arrived days after the card is sheer incompetence. But here's what really went wrong: the bank never empowered its service people to take action that could have solved the problem at any stage in what was likely an extreme and exceptional case.
Empower Your Agents
The first agent should have been able to waive any fees regarding the shipment of a new card. The card was turned off unexpectedly by the bank; the bank should have handled all aspects of turning the card back on. Apparently, this was not an option available to the agent.
Next, the agent should have been allowed to reverse the fee charged to the customer when the bank failed to live up to its side of the agreement. Even if you believe that the fee was acceptable, the fact that the customer was never informed about it is remarkably slipshod behavior -- and when the card arrived two days after it was promised, it should have been refunded as a goodwill gesture.
Finally, the PIN debacle is perhaps the most embarrassing aspect of all. Agents certainly can't assign new PINs over the phone -- but they should be able to provide alternatives to customers when exceptional events occur -- especially when they are caused by the bank.
If you have a set of security policies in place that might lead to someone being cut off from their cash at an inopportune time or for an undue duration, why don't you have some policies in place to help your customers cope with the results?
Sure, banks have regulations to meet that protect privacy and prevent fraud. But their principal reason to exist is to serve the customer -- or, at least, that's supposed to be the reason they exist. Losing sight of that will doom customer relationships in any business -- so look at your policies from a customer perspective and empower your agents to do more than offer effusive apologies.