Does your financial institution act like the customer is always right, or always wrong?

msf

I've been thinking about this because I'm running across an attitude that I had hoped had vanished decades ago: whatever our system (computer) says has to be right.

Maybe that could fly in the 70s when people weren't familiar with computers and they were regarded as infallible automatons, but these days I thought people's understanding was more along the lines (also from the 70s) of: To err is human, but to really foul things up takes a computer.

I'm getting this attitude from my regional health insurer. It doesn't matter how absurd the error is, or how little the person I'm dealing with understands about the issue, their system must be right. I must be a dolt not to understand and they'll walk me through exactly what's printed on their paper, even though that's what's wrong.

We got a similar attitude from Wells Fargo years ago when we tried to open an account. Okay, WF has lots more problems than this. But they couldn't conceive the possibility that data in their system was wrong (they'd recorded someone else as having one of our SSNs).

In contrast, at Fidelity I've always been met with an attitude that, okay there's a problem. Let's see what we can do. We don't know yet if we did something wrong (which we'll fix) or you're mistaken, but let's talk.

I'm appreciating the difference more and more. They can all be courteous and polite, but that doesn't matter if they're starting from the premise that the customer must be wrong.

Crash

I'm with ya, 100%. A few years ago, I was with a credit union which fouled up a stop-payment request. And so even though they f***** it up, my account was charged the $20.00 for the request. I was so effing livid, I did not even have the presence of mind to insist that the $20.00 charge be reversed, and right then and there, I closed my account. REAL suck-bags........ And further, along with what you were sharing: isn't it just wonderful, after they screw-up at their end, but refuse to acknowledge it---then, if you dare to show or express any aggravation (because they are doing ALL they CAN to aggravate you---) they threaten to terminate the call and stop dealing with you. Yup. Somehow, being overly-polite and obsequious has become more important than actually getting things RIGHT and accurate. It's a whole culture that we face, whenever we call the Customer Rage and Aggravation phone number. Or, as they prefer to call it: "Customer Service." And the ones who greet you when you call have no authority to do or correct ANYTHING. All by design. Because maybe you'll do the logical thing and get angry at how many times you have to repeat the same shit to different people, and hang up. That's what they're hoping for. Yes. It happens when dealing even with government agencies. You would not believe how many ways the MassDOT EZ Pass idiots screwed up my account before they finally got it right. One time, when I was on with them, I was assured everything was straightened out. Only to be told later on that "your ACCOUNT was activated, but not your TRANSPONDER." Huh? ...And I suppose that actually makes sense to the Melon-head who's supposed to be in charge.

msf

When that happens to me, I try to weigh the continued aggravation of possibly dealing with the place against the cost of leaving/replacing. Sometimes the aggravation wins (like you, I leave), sometimes the pocketbook wins but I try to minimize interactions.

Thanks for the tip on MassDOT. I'll keep it in mind if I ever have to deal with them. (Basically, try not to.)

I've got a Mass EZPass - I don't live in Mass, but they don't add a monthly fee, so I can keep the transponder around for the one time every year or two I use it.

JohnChisum

The aggravation of leaving does prevent many from pulling their money out but when it's time to roll over that 401k, that company is not even thought of.

Old_Skeet

For what it is worth.

I think ... in short words ... the question is "Does your brokerage firm, and broker, do business as though they are bigger than you ... their client?" If your feeling is that they do ... Then I'd be moving on.

MikeM2

USAA as a bank and insurer has been AMAZING for 20yrears. In 1996 they screwed up my car coverage and I was without insurance for several months. When I recognized the problem and called them THEY reviewed the call transcripts and backdated the coverage. Great customer service. Mike

MikeM

I try very hard to align my financial life around companies that have brick and mortar presence where I can walk in and talk to a human eye to eye. The difference in walking in a door and talking to a person compared to talking to who-knows-who on the phone is huge to me. When I wanted to move my 401k money to an IRA, it was down to 2 companies with office presence in my area, Fidelity and Schwab. Now at Schwab, I can email a question or concern any time to my local financial consultant and I get an email or a cal back usually within minutes, even after office hours! I try to keep all my banking with a local credit union that was originally started by and affiliated to my work place, Kodak.

It is impractical to have brick and mortar for everything, but I have had good helpful correspondence with a couple other institutions. I still have some 401k money in T. Rowe Price. I also do web-banking with Ally Bank. Any correspondence with these groups either by email or phone has been super.

hank

This cuts to the heart of why we choose/not choose to do business with an institution. I've gotten both ends of the treatment so won't generalize.

- After having a mortgage with a local institution and a checking account for near 15 years, I approached one of their agents a year ago with paperwork requiring a signature guarantee. The amount wasn't large - a transfer of 2 or 3 K from one fund house to another. The agent went hyperbolic claiming she couldn't possibly provide the signature guarantee without a letter to her from my fund custodian verifying that the amount being transferred was actually on deposit. She'd read "horror stories" of bank agents being held liable "for millions" for fraudulent activity related to signature guarantees. Two blocks down the street my credit union cheerfully provided the signature guarantee (It was the holiday season). A few weeks later I closed the checking account with the first institution.

- Minor issues with T. Rowe have always been amicably resolved, though once I needed to wait 2-3 weeks for a senior agent to rule on the matter. That one involved a late day transaction which apparently failed to completely clear until a few seconds after the 4 PM deadline. In the end they sided with me.

- Oppenheimer, on the other hand, isn't so accomodating. They had their system programmed to deduct my annual IRA service fee from one of my more volatile funds (and a badly depressed one). I was informed they had no provision for me to pay the fee directly. So I convinced one of their agents to change the annual deduction to a less volatile fund. While he agreed "to try" on the phone, the requested change never occurred. Here the computer clearly won out.