It's all about attitude

I received a letter from my homeowner's insurance company the other day saying that I was past due on my payment. The thing is, I don't make a payment to them -- it's all supposed to be taken care of by my mortgage company. They apparently didn't pay it. That's a problem. No payment, no coverage.

I figured that something had gotten mixed up, but that with a couple of quick calls I'd get the whole thing straightened out. I called my mortgage company (hereafter referred to as Big Company 1) first to see if they had made the payment. Navigating through the endless menu of a too-big-for its-own-good IVR system, I was able to determine that BC1 had made a payment to my insurance company (hereafter referred to as Big Company 2) on the 11th. BC1 sent my letter on the 12th. Payment was due on the 13th. I assumed that payment would be made at that last minute. Score BC1 - 0, BC2 -0

With information that BC1 had paid BC2, I tried to contact BC2 to verify that my letter was just sent "too quickly," and that they in deed received payment and that I was still covered. Unfortunately, it was a weekend and BC2 was not big enough to have a 7-day call center to answer my questions. This would have to wait until Monday. BC1 - 0, BC2 -1 point for not being open on the weekend when I needed to contact them.

So on Monday I called BC2 and asked them to verify that they had received payment. They had not, but based on my statement that BC1 had sent payment, they made note not to cancel my coverage pending receipt of payment from BC1. BC2 stated that in their dealing with other members that had BC1 mortgages, this was not unusual and that they had likely send the payment snail-mail so they were expecting a 5-10 day window before they received my payment. Why a Billion dollar banking company (aka BC1) still uses snail mail to sent payments instead of EFT, surprises me, but I guess it earns them a few hundred thousand dollars in float interest -- stuff we get penalized for and pay the price for. BC2 also stated that BC1 called BC2 on the 10th to verify the premium amount. Score BC1 -2 points for not using the most efficient means of finance and causing problems for me and apparently many others, BC2 - 0 for continuing coverage and the friendliness of the agent.

Grateful for continued coverage, I then called BC1 back to validate the payment and complain that they caused a late payment. They said that they never actually received a bill, but had noticed that a bill should've been received and made a proactive (but tardy) call to check on the amount due. At my initiation, I checked the address that the bill should've been sent to. It was wrong on my paperwork from BC2. I obtained the correct information to pass along to BC2. BC1 also stated that they had sent a letter to BC2 in February of 2007 to correct this information because of apparently similar issues last year. As I ended the call, BC1 agent had to finish her script ("I'm glad I was able to help resolve your issues today. Was there something else that I could help you with today? Did you know that you could also check the status of your account on line? Thank you for choosing...blah, blah, blah) So, now back to BC2 to complain that they weren't following up. Score BC1 -1 (points for being proactive and trying to correct the problem, but no bonus points for the the attitude and scriptiness of the BC1 agent ) BC2 -1 for not keeping a clean house.

Calling BC2 back to correct the address, I was connected to another agent than the one I talked to before. When I explained the issue she was quick to verify that the address was correct in the record now, but had been recently changed. She also pointed out that she, at BC2 processed over 50 BC1 policies a week (or was it day) and that BC1 used a boilerplate contract for each of them. Nothing should've changed from any other policy holder with regard to the address, etc. She couldn't explain how things got out of synch, but was empathetic to my problems and woes. She assured me that things were all set now and thanked me for my leg-work. We'll have to wait for next year to see if things are REALLY taken care of. Score BC1 still -1, BC2 - even for attitude.

So after all that, I'm not overly impressed with the whole system, but I was thinking about it last night and I still had a generally negative attitude toward BC1, while my attitude toward BC2 was actually overall positive. Both companies said that the other one was to blame for the issues. Both companies seemed to screw things up or at least drop the ball (though with all facts on the table, it looks like BC2 may have messed up a little more.) Yet I still had a better impression of BC2 than of BC1. Why? I guess BC1 was too big and made me feel like account #A2047265582, while BC2, treated me like one of their customers who had been inconvenienced. In the end it didn't matter who was wrong, it was how they made me feel...

I'm still a little pissed that I, the customer -- of BOTH companies, had to be the one to do the leg work, but unfortunately that's not unusual nowadays. I remember spending over a week dealing with the dealer when trying to get my first car. The car was late and they couldn't give me an ETA on when it would arrive. I finally gave up and called the manufacturer customer service line and within about 10 minutes I knew exactly where my car was and when it would arrive. It ticked me off so much that I wrote a very detailed 10-page letter to the dealership management, ownership, the manufacturer, and about 10 other people I'm sure really didn't care either, but at least I got it off my chest. In the end I was told that my letter was used in dealership training classes for the brand. I don't believe that, but that's what they said.

It's a real shame that we as consumers have to do so much ourselves -- stuff we're paying others to do. If a company were to just focus on customers for a while, image the possibilities...