I don’t think the inconsistency in user experience is defensible.
I’m on the record as saying that removing the chat button was a bad decision. You don’t deal with crowds outside your branch by taking down your signage and directing those who can find the instructions to the back door.
But an inconsistent experience between users is even worse:
-
If it’s an experiment it’s been going on too long. And, in my view, it’s unethical to experiment with supporting customers, some of whom would be vulnerable. (I don’t think it’s an experiment).
-
If it’s an algorithm, again I’d suggest it’s unethical. Having a routine determine which customers should be more entitled to easy help (or who are more likely to make contact and must therefore be put off) is, in my view, indefensible.
-
If it’s a bug, it’s well overdue fixing. (I don’t think it’s a bug).
I can sympathize with executives who are dealing with overwhelmed and expensive customer service. If Monzo can’t bear the cost of effective customer service (which I understand is still several times cheaper per customer than high street banks) then something has gone terribly wrong. But I could still see the logic in it, even if I disliked it, if it were the same for all customers. It’s not, and that is terribly disappointing.