Credit where credit's due

Re-reading my rather vitriolic rant on Saturday, it began to dawn on me that perhaps I'd been more than just a little unfair.  Irrespective of the rights and wrongs involved, companies aren't psychic, and often the easiest way of getting changes made is simply to ask for them.  With that in mind, I popped into the Coventry Building Society local branch this morning, spoke to a very pleasant and sympathetic guy who said he'd "see what he could do" and within a matter of minutes my £40 was refunded - albeit it with the caveat that "we won't be able to do this again".  Fair enough.

So I'm once again a happy customer.  Props to the Coventry for living up to their slogan, and for realizing - perhaps - that a happy customer is also a loyal member.

Coventry Building Society = TLC? I don't think so!

In common with one-and-a-half million other people, I entrust my money to the UK's third-largest building society - the Coventry. It just happens to be my local one, and while I'm not as a general rule particularly sold on the ethos of supporting local businesses per se, it is convenient - although most of my transactions are done online anyway. In recent years, the UK banking industry has come in for some pretty harsh stinging criticism, so it's perhaps not surprising that Coventry Building Society sets great store on being owned by their members (aka customers) with the slogan TLC not PLC. Hmm...

Also in common with x million other people, I don't keep a lot of money in my account sitting earning negligible interest- just enough to cover bills, basically. While I log on and check transactions/balances pretty regularly, I have a life and I have better things to do than monitor it 24/7! So I was dismayed to discover yesterday that a couple of Direct Debits had escaped my attention and had been "bounced", the CBS ripping me off to the tune of £20 each for the privilege of doing so, according to a couple of smug little messages which had appeared in my inbox. I use the term "rip-off" there advisedly, as these extortionate fees have been the subject of much dissatisfaction from bank customers in recent years and were the subject of a failed attempt by the Office of Fair Trading to get them outlawed by the Courts. Even though the true cost to the bank of a processing a failed DD has been reliably estimated at around £2-£2.50, I suppose I should console myself with the fact I'm only out of pocket to the extent of £40: the going rate at other UK banks is almost twice that. Nevertheless, adding another £20 apiece to the cost of a couple of things I'd bought for a few quid each seems to me to be just adding insult to injury.

I shan't bother complaining: someone's got to pay for the Directors' fat bonuses. Despite a fancy advertising slogan promising "we listen to customers", there are none as deaf as those that won't hear. However, next time the cashier serves me with the customary line of idle chit-chat patter... "and how's your day?" I shall be sorely tempted to tell him/her - in words of one syllable!

**Update - see next entry: Monday 11 June  **

Spy in the shopping basket?

One of the more bizarre stories in the paper today contains the revelation that checkout cashiers at Sainsburys are to be trained to spot (from their shopping patterns) customers who might be entitled to carers' support without realizing it, and to make "discrete"(sic) enquiries - following a pilot scheme in Torbay. I daresay the idea is well-intentioned, as was probably the one that backfired rather spectacularly a couple of years ago when a pregnant customer was refused a piece of cheddar cheese because the deli assistant thought (wrongly, as it turned out) that it would be bad for her health.

But just where does this sort of thing stop? Am I to be identified for referral to an alcohol advisory service if I happen to buy more than one bottle of wine? Or maybe some counselling for obesity on the strength of the regular bag of jam doughnuts? Fortunately, I should find it relatively easy to avoid the "Colleague engagement director's" next whizzo idea as I only ever use self-service checkouts now (and I make sure I turn the 'voice' off before I start!)

Big Brother is watching... but Big Sister talks as well!

A "news" item this morning writes about the hidden identity of the 'mystery voice' behind self-service checkouts at supermarkets. Other than saying that she - it's obviously (and apparently deliberately) a female - reminds me of a primary school teacher addressing a group of slightly backward six-year olds, I don't really care who she is. But as with many such articles, the interesting part I find is the comments people have been making in response to it.

Perhaps unsurprisingly it's revealing a 'love-it-or-loathe-it' pattern of comments, with rather more than I personally would've anticipated expressing opposition on the grounds of job losses. With a bank of six self-serve terminals, the "attendant", as he/she is called, can in theory serve six customers compared to the one at a staffed checkout - but not all six at the same time: it's simply redistributing the waiting. Ideally, most of the six wouldn't need help, but in practice they do - which highlights the other common type of comment, namely that they're unnecessarily awkward to use.

Having got some six months' experience of using them regularly now, I'd say that they seem to be designed mainly on the assumption that the customer is going to put a basket of stuff through slowly and carefully, one item at a time. Whacking a trolley-load through quickly and expertly does seem to throw it a bit, and 'Madam The Voice' can't keep up with you. A mismatch between how the store thinks customers are going to use something, compared to how they actually do in practice, perhaps?

But queues or not, my guess is that they have a very long way to go before they overtake traditional staffed checkouts as most customers' preferred way of paying.

Bonfire of the Quangos

Whenever we need to get a prescription re-ordered from the Doctor's surgery, I send them an e-mail: it's quick, free, convenient and - until recently - reliable. However, the chemist had apparently been told there wasn't anything ready last time they went to collect it, and the receptionists have been claiming not to have received the order. So since it was the third time this has happened, I decided I'd had enough. I don't know how reliable or otherwise the NHS mail servers are, but on the assumption that it may be an IT problem rather than any particular fault of the surgery's, I contacted NHS Coventry - the body responsible for running NHS services locally, and soon-to-be-abolished under the government's new Quango-purging initiative.

This morning I got the paperwork telling me how they're going about *hopefully* getting something done about the problem. There was also a two-page 'anti-discrimination' questionnaire. Normally I just bin these pieces of nosey politically-correct nonsense, but this particular one took the biscuit. As well as asking for my postcode (which was on the envelope they'd sent it in) and my sex (which they could have had a shot at deducing from the "Mr" it was addressed to), it asked whether I was - amongst other things - bisexual, agnostic or gender-reassigned. Huh?? What the hell has that got to do with why my e-mails are going missing? Any questions, it said, could be directed to the "Head of Equality and Human Rights". With a title like that, he or she has got to be earning more in a day than I get in a week. Whatever.... I bet they'll make a superb 'guy' with which to crown this particular Quango bonfire!

Above the law?

I popped across to the supermarket earlier this morning to get the paper and a few bits and pieces, and as I walked across the car park towards the front door I noticed a police car parked in the end space. Nothing unusual in that - they seem to visit quite often, generally to buy a sandwich or something during their shift, I think. What I noticed today, though, is how untidily it had been parked, skewed in the marked space with the offside front wheel firmly over the hatched part which of course you're supposed to leave clear. The car was unoccupied, but as I passed by I saw a WPC come up to it: she must've seen the filthy look I was giving it and read what I was thinking, because as she opened the door and got in, she said: "I might have a prisoner". In fact she didn't, because she drove off alone, and as she did so I spotted that she'd been using one of the spaces set aside for parents with young children in buggies. Perhaps the expected prisoner was a toddler?

The enforcement of parking is generally now up to the local council or parking wardens rather than the police, but all the same I did idly wonder what she'd have said if the positions had been reversed and I'd been the one using a space I wasn't entitled to.

Twisted logic

I was doing the shopping at the supermarket this morning, when I spotted amongst the deodorants and shower gels, a prominent notice (right at head height on the shelf): "For your safety and security, we always prosecute thieves". Huh? Exactly how is prosecuting someone who pinches a can of deodorant for the benefit of MY safety/security, I wonder?

Deterring shoplifters is arguably for the benefit of honest customers generally in that if, say, one in twenty cans gets pilfered, the store simply jacks up the price of the other nineteen to make up for the loss. Whether the prospect of an actual prosecution is a deterrent or not, given the sentence the Court is likely to pass, is a moot point.

I'd be slightly more convinced by the argument that CCTV enhances my safety and security, although the store of course installs it primarily for their benefit rather than mine. Pickpockets and bag-snatchers are known to target other customers, but I believe it's relatively rare for a shoplifter to do so unless the customer gets in the way or tries to stop them. I have occasionally seen notices advising customers to keep hold of their wallets, purses, handbags etc - but much more discreetly and more infrequently. I suspect the store doesn't like either the nuisance value or the bad publicity.

Diversity? Epic fail!

Recent years have seen a move towards emphasizing the importance of "diversity" in everything. I don't particularly object to seeing the word "partner" (in place of wife / husband / boyfriend / girlfriend etc), used to denote a person with whom you may have any sort of semi-permanent relationship: it does avoid the potentially awkward question as to whether there's a legal basis for it, notwithsanding the sex of the person concerned. Similarly I'm happy to write he/she where the person I'm writing about could be either.

But then I'm not writing something like an ad or a set of instructions for public consumption. I'd instinctively assume those who are would be doubly conscious of the need to be aware of the realities of these things. Hence my surprise at buying a new fragrance of shower gel - Lynx Twist to be precise - yesterday, and finding written in the blurb on the back:
"A blast of fresh fragrance to make a good first impression which twists into long-lasting refreshment to keep her tantalized and intrigued by you"
Huh? "her"?
Perhaps it ought to have a warning on the label "Not recommended for gays"? I didn't check the other Lynx fragrances to see how the slogans on those were worded. Or perhaps I just inadventently picked the one marketed at boys aiming to impress their mothers? Yes, that must be it.

And not before time, either

Interesting news item tonight, from which I see that a fraudster has been hauled up before the Courts for shill bidding on eBay. The article contains a nice little quote to illustrate how much they claim to be spending to conteract fraud on the site, but it's still very much a case of "caveat emptor" and always has been - or at least for as long as I've been a member. The plain fact is that the buyer shoulders virtually all the risk over what is essentially a pig-and-a-poke, and the practice of partially blanking other buyers' names so you can't tell who they are makes dodgy dealing very difficult to spot however suspicious you may be. I suspect the guy who got caught was either greedy or careless or possibly both.

It does of course give a bad name to the majority of sellers who are honest and conscientious: certainly I've had some real bargains, as well as fair treatment as a regular customer - all of which counterbalances a proportion of duds from idiots out to make a quick buck for little or no effort. It hasn't put me off buying anyway, and I will say that on the couple of occasions I've had to claim refunds recently, I got my money back both quickly and easily.

The throwaway society

During my efforts at gardening over the past few days, I've become increasingly aware that the pair of hand shears I've been using to clip the shrubs and overgrowing foliage are pretty blunt. They only cut properly at the extreme tip and at the very least need sharpening and adjusting. I can't remember how long I've had them nor how much I paid for them, but they weren't "el cheapo" ones and up until now they've given pretty good service. Quite some years ago I had the lawn mower serviced and some shears done as well, but the guy I used then seems to no longer be in business and I couldn't track anyone down locally who advertises that they do this sort of thing. Maybe like the village blacksmith/knife sharpener, it's a dying trade.

Hardly surprising in a way: I did find online a professional tool sharpening service which would cost £6 - reasonable enough - but plus £4 for the return carriage plus whatever it cost me to pack them securely and send them (probably another £4). Against that, the cost of some new ones with a 5-year guarantee is £13. So on the face of it, it looks like it's pretty uneconomic to get them serviced. Which is true of an increasing number of consumer goods of all shapes and sizes these days: the high labour cost of fixing something like a toaster or a coffee machine for example means I wouldn't even try, and with something like a washing machine the call-out charge alone tots up to almost £100. It all amounts to a considerable disincentive to even try and prolong the life of anything by repairing it. I daresay the scrap metal guy who comes round in his lorry touting for business does rather well out of it all, though.