Nearly one crore customers complain to their banks and other REs every year, and the number has not changed much in the last three years. That’s what the Committee for Review of Customer Service Standards in RBI Regulated Entities, which the RBI set up last year, has found. Reviewing these complaints, the panel has made several suggestions to improve customer experience, including while lodging complaints. Below are some of the suggestions made by the panel:
Fraudulent transactions
Reporting fraud at banks could be a complex process and many customers could not be fully aware of the process and the norms. To make it easier for customers, the panel suggests an online facility be made available on the Indian Cybercrime Reporting Portal for registering complaints by members of public in respect of fraudulent transactions.
The complaint should trigger an automated alert mail from the victim’s bank to beneficiary bank/card issuer/merchants for blocking the flow of funds. The beneficiary bank should immediately block equivalent amount in the account till detailed verification of the reported transaction in the complaint is completed.
In case of merchants, sale/dispatch of merchandise should be kept on hold. All these may be implemented as STP, to the extent possible. STP, or straight-through-processing, means end-to-end automated process without any manual intervention.
Streamlining the call centres
The call centre of REs may be designed with a dedicated IVRS flow, sharing the important ‘do’s and don’ts’ with the customer, based on the customer profile/queries, including provision of in-house financial advisors for complex queries or sophisticated customers, the oanel recommends.An automated call-back feature in call centre, when a call is dropped mid-way, must to be provided. Option to speak to the customer care executive should be part of all menu options, so that you don’t keep pressing buttons trying to find out which one to press to speak to the executive.
A common complaint portal
Another valuable suggestion is to create a common complaint portal so that the customer doesn’t have to complain to the very RE against which the customer has a complaint.
The panel suggests an RE-agnostic common portal for lodging complaints to be set up by the RBI so that the customers of any RE can lodge complaints on a single platform. The portal may allocate the complaints to respective REs, enable facility for tracking of the complaints by the complainant and for automatic escalation of rejected complaints to the IOs. Going forward, the RBI may also consider integrating this platform with its Complaint Management System portal to provide for seamless transfer and movement of complaints and data.
Till the common complaint portal comes up, the REs should have a system to enable the complainant to track the progress in processing of the complaint. The expected time for resolution of the complaint should invariably be communicated to the complainant. If the turnaround time for resolution is exceeded, it should be communicated to the complainant, indicating reasons for the delay.
When a complaint is not considered a complaint
While analysing the customer complaints against the REs, the panel found that there was lack of uniformity among REs in classifying the complaints. Several complaints were being treated as suggestions/queries by some REs, which probably makes the RE’s job easier since a complaint must be resolved while a suggestion or a query has no such requirement. Also, that helps keep the number of complaints down. With fewer complaints, a bank is considered more efficient.
The panel thinks that absence of a uniform definition of complaints under Internal Grievance Redress (IGR) mechanism, unlike under the Reserve Bank – Integrated Ombudsman Scheme (RB-IOS), gives rise to such divergence. The RBI should lay down a definition of what constitutes a complaint against an RE under IGR, so that the real picture of the volume, types and nature of complaints and the state of customer service in the REs emerges.
An indicative definition could be: “Any reference received formally through electronic or paper mode flagging a “deficiency in service”, as defined in RB-IOS, pertaining to all the activities which the RE undertakes and services it offers.”
Making internal ombudsman more independent
If an internal ombudsman draws the salary from the RE where it’s appointed, it creates a conflict of interest. To address this conflict of interests, and to increase the effectiveness of the internal ombudsmen appointed in the REs, the RBI may nudge the Indian Banks’ Association (IBA) to create a fund to directly pay the salary/compensation to the internal ombudsmen of the banks, the panel recommends.
Similar funds can be created by respective self-regulatory organisations for other categories of REs. Alternatively, the RBI itself may consider creating the fund. Cost of the above fund, thus created, may be recovered from the REs, in proportion to the complaints against them referred to the internal ombudsmen.
