- Date & Time
- Phone Number
- Who is calling? - Will you give a Full Name?
- Madi (refused to give last name for 'personal reasons')
- What company are you calling from?
- What is the purpose of your call?
- How did you obtain this phone number and my personal details?
- What personal information do you hold?
- Name, Address & Phone Number
- Will you give the companies VAT No. to confirm you are calling from a legitimate company? - If not then why not?
- Madi advised that I could find the information myself on-line - he then proceeded to give me an incorrect web address. When questioned on this Madi became confrontational.
- Would you be willing to give me your personal information so that I can contact you with a follow-up call to discuss the information collected and posted from this phone call.
- Call Duration
After the call I did a quick web search and within 30 seconds I was able to find the Registration No: 02728936 and the FSA Reg No: 312708 - there is no legitimate reason to withhold this information.
When Madi advised he was hanging up the phone, he did so by supposedly removing the cable from the socket, however I could still hear background noise on the phone so I remained on the line. In under 1 minute a woman came on the line and began asking why I had called her - she was became abusive and irate - and she threatened to call the police before she hung-up. The fact that I could hear the call centre noises in the background leads me to believe that she also found my response to their call amusing. However, such unprofessional and immature attitudes are unacceptable in the workplace and further action will be taken against Payment Shield.
Conclusion:
I do not believe that the nature of the call was of a malicious nature, purely opportunistic. However, the general attitude and poor customer relation skills lead me to doubt the validity of this company. Any organisation that would allow individuals with such poor people skills access to a telephone, let alone encourage them to call members of the public is worrying.
Rating:
Co-operation: 4 / 5 Madi was uncooperative and unwilling to provide the information requested
Professionalism: 5 / 5 The immature behaviour of the staff and poor people skills give the worst score for professionalism
Malicious: 2 / 5 Although the initial intention of the call was not malicious, the staff became sop as the call continued
Annoyance: 3 / 5 It was an annoyance purely due to the unprofessional and sardonic attitudes of the staff
Success: 4 / 5 I was able to usurp the phone call, stopping Madi from completing his objective
Total Score: 18 / 25 complaints have been sent to the company and to the FSA
- A score of 5 is the perfect score
- Between 6 and 10 is classed as good
- Between 11 and 15 is classed as acceptable
- Between 16 and 20 is classed as poor and a report should be considered
- Between 21 and 24 is unacceptable and a brief report should be sent to the relevant agencies
- A score of 25 is appalling and must be reported immediately
