It’s not really their responsibility to help fix someone’s gambling issues, but I agree with you because I view what happened there as a similar thing to pen testing and bug bounty programs. If a user finds a way to break Monzo’s implementation, or find ways to circumvent a feature, they ought to use that to help them shape ways they could improve upon it.
With that said, given they like to toot their own horn a lot here, and have a specialist team internally, you would think they would have gone the extra mile and actually live up to their claims. If they’re circumventing it with Paypal, block PayPal deposits.
But kicking them off just reminds me of a tactic often employed by care companies if a particular client’s needs are difficult to meet. It’s easier to just sack them than up their game and provide the advertised service, and it’s not to detriment their CQC reports, but actually benefits them.
2 Likes
Anarchist
(Press ‘Help’ search ‘Contact us’ or email help@monzo.com or call 0800 802 1281)
397
We don’t know that they didn’t. All we know is that the ombudsman said that there was a significant number of interactions with the customer and some didn’t end well.
According to the ombudsman,
[Monzo took] into account the additional support Mr B might be expected to need given his vulnerabilities.
At the end of that, Monzo claimed that the relationship had become unsustainable, and the ombudsman agreed that it wasn’t unfair to close the account.
We don’t know whether or not Monzo went an extra mile or two, but it seems that they didn’t exactly drop him like a hot potato at the earliest opportunity.
That could be tricky to word and I think the media would have a field day with it.
“You’re messaging support way above the average person does. Please make use of our guides or your account may be suspended”.
The approach they’re taking now is probably best. Let everyone on here exhaust themselves debating it all and then it will die off like the frozen accounts saga.
I think there wouldn’t be any drama with more transparency. People who aren’t harassing support wouldn’t have to worry at all.
If people would be aware, that after a support chat not only they can rate how much they liked a “support person”, but it works both way, they might be nicer in a first place.
You don’t think there would be loads of bad press from it? There certainly was from the frozen accounts issue and it can’t have helped the business.
I also doubt it would make much difference to the amount of support queries they get. People will still get in touch to try and argue their case regardless of what they’re told the reason is.
But of course, we’re debating this again on the assumption that they can tell people the cause. Which from all the facts people have posted it seems like they can’t even if they wanted to.
1 Like
Anarchist
(Press ‘Help’ search ‘Contact us’ or email help@monzo.com or call 0800 802 1281)
404
I must admit, I don’t know if Monzo have ever given a reason directly to the customer even if they can. For instance, in the infamous ‘Mr B’ case above, Monzo could have given a reason, but it’s not clear whether or not they did(other than to the ombudsman.
It could be seen two ways though. If monzo weren’t addressing the issues experienced by people, resulting in then accessing support more often and monzo then closes their accounts it looks very bad.
Plenty of people come to the forum with their issues looking for how to contact support…
Monzo can obviously improve but as seen on here, most people just don’t look/read for themselves. In most cases, typing their thread title into help or Google would solve their issue. But people are lazy and want it handed to them.
True. But people are clearly finding support (If we’re basing this on one person’s complaint)
It would be an absolute nightmare for Monzo to publish this and not have a monster backlash. Some people will just be unlucky/unsure and want to talk to support. Your bank should do that, not tick another box on your countdown chart and tell you how many times you can talk to them again this month without getting cut off.
That’s just reminded me of the whole telephone thing. Plenty of people have complained that calling Monzo results in the call being disconnected but interestingly if they consider done or aren’t going to deal with you anymore they simply block your number from calling.
To be fair, would you really want your bank telling you “We’re closing your account because you’ve been a dick to our customer support agents”? Again, it’s one of those ‘can’t win’ situations, I guess.
My recollection, to put it this in the form that it was explained by a then-Monzo staff member, was they only block withheld numbers when they’re getting abusive calls. They don’t block specific customer numbers.
Found the quote. Admittedly, it’s not quite as I remembered it:
Anarchist
(Press ‘Help’ search ‘Contact us’ or email help@monzo.com or call 0800 802 1281)
409
They could say “The relationship has become unsustainable” in those circumstances.
I’m not suggesting they should give reasons where they legally can, I’m just wondering if they ever do.
I see no reason why the account holder should not be told the reason why an account is being closed, if it is for a reason other than suspected Financial Crime.
