The Central Accounting Unit Customer Survey 2000

The Central Accounting Unit Customer Survey 2000
The Results 

This document was created in July 2001

Annex A

CUSTOMER SURVEY: ACTION PLAN

  1. CUSTOMER SERVICES SECTION

    1. Faxed statement requests

      2. A number of IP’s raised the fact that there was inconsistency when requesting a faxed statement, quite often this request has been refused but on occasions CAU has faxed statements. The correct policy is that we do not fax statements because of the time it would take if a number of IP’s requested the service. However, we do exercise discretion and in certain circumstances we have faxed.

      ACTION: CAU will accept faxed statements

    2. Multiple statements being received by IP’s

      3. This can be due to a case being closed and subsequently re-opened or, in a joint liquidation, CAU’s computer system having both IP’s as “main” liquidators, resulting in duplicate automatic statements. Apparently this can be resolved by CUST we have previously been advised that there is nothing that can be done.

      ACTION: IT System Change required – scheduled to be addressed in the next stage of BANCS development

    3. Statements not being received / incorrect firm names

      4. This usually occurs when an IP has moved firms or is administering different cases at different addresses. Once notified by the IP, Reconciliation Section currently log it as correspondence and minute LOLA or IPCU to update the Central Index which interfaces with BANCS, the IP is then advised in writing There are a number of occasions when an I.P fails to advise IPCU/CAU of changes.

      ACTION: Procedure now in place where CAU advise IPCU and request change where incorrect names come to light

    4. Incorrect case name details on Compulsory & Bankruptcy estates

      5. When IP’s advise CAU that the case name is incorrect they are often passed to the OR and back again. When a query of this nature arises somebody needs to take ownership of the query and contact the appropriate OR’s office.

      ACTION: Procedure now in place where CAU advise the Official Receiver and request change where incorrect names come to light

    5. Number of balance requests per telephone call

      6. The current procedure is that only 5 balance requests can be given on one call. Obviously this is causing unnecessary criticism of CAU and there is no apparent reason why it can’t be immediately changed to an infinite number per call.

      ACTION: Procedure changed CAU now deal with all balance requests

    6. Automatic statement request

    Need to investigate why a few stated that they were unsatisfied or very unsatisfied with automatic statements. This has been discussed on a number of occasions at the User Group and should no longer be an issue when on-line access is implemented. IP’s can ask for a statement at any time in addition to the automatic

    Six monthly statements.

    ACTION: CAU to feed into April 2001 User Group to assess what solution users want.

  1. RECONCILIATION

    1. Backdated posting onto estates.

      2. BANCS, the current accounting system was designed to back date postings to capture the correct fees and interest due. During the current research underway for a replacement to BANCS, CAU have requested that postings are not backdated and a journal adjustments is made for fees and interest corrections

      ACTION: IT System Change required – scheduled to be addressed in the next stage of BANCS development

    2. Telephone queries

      3. An area highlighted was that IP’s can telephone CAU and ask for advice, but any action requires a formal written request in order for the query to be rectified. I would suggest that it is not good customer service to request an IP put something in writing when CAU may have made the mistake. It would be better practice to log the call, investigate the error, put it right if CAU got it wrong and then advise the IP. If however, the IP is asking, for example, that funds be moved between accounts and it transpires
      that CAU had correctly processed the instruction originally then we should ask for written authority to make the amendments.

      ACTION: CAU concluded change was inappropriate as a written request was necessary to protect the user (The appointment holder) as evidence of the changes requested by his/her staff.

    3. Confirmation that account has been reconciled

      4. .

      Some IP’s commented that we did not always confirm in writing with a statement of account. The standing instruction is to send confirmation of the reconciliation.

      ACTION: Procedures are already in force and CAU management to remind staff that they be followed.

    4. Holding letter

    A suggestion that if a query is going to take longer that the target dates then CAU should advise in writing. This is a current standing instruction.

    ACTION: Procedures are already in force and CAU management to remind staff that they be followed.

  1. RECEIPTS & PAYMENTS

    1. Cheque turnaround

      2. A number of IP’s stated that cheques have taken 10 working days to arrive. Statistics have been recently audited and confirm the accuracy of the published targets.

      ACTION: Procedures, which have been audited show 98% compliance – need for change not evidenced in practice.

    2. Faxing Requisitions

      3. This is not an option because we require an original signature for the protection of the user.

      ACTION: Reiterate the security issues through the User Group and publish on the Website.

    3. Posting receipts to suspense or joint accounts

      4. IP’s complained that despite clearly stating on a Bank Giro Credit slip that funds are for a sub-account such as a fixed charge or separate account, the credit has just been posted to the main account. This results in the IP having to write in to request we amend the account and in effect he has requested the same action twice.

      ACTION: CAU unable to effect change as the aspect of layout complained of is specifically required by existing banking rules

    4. Cancelling & reissuing in date & out of date cheques

      5. Although the majority of respondents were satisfied there were a few who rated it as very unsatisfied and this needs to be addressed. Statistics have been recently audited and confirm 98% compliance with the published targets.

      ACTION: CAU to review current targets.

    5. Maintaining accurate estate ledgers

      6. The speed of posting receipts was commented on, particularly in relation to requisitions being returned due to insufficient funds. Statistics have been recently audited and confirm the accuracy of published targets.

      ACTION: CAU to feed into April 2001 User Group to assess what solution users want.

    6. Notifying IP’s of account number in Voluntary Liquidation cases

    Again IP’s stated that this was of high importance to them but they were not totally satisfied with the service. This is an area that is not recorded on statistical returns; the level of service will be reviewed.

    ACTION: CAU management to audit the situation to assess the level of inaccuracy

  1. INTEREST BEARING

    1. Incorrect IB on case closure

      2. Obviously when IB is recalculated this causes associated reconciliation problems. The method of calculating IB will be reviewed.

      ACTION: CAU management to audit the situation to assess the level of inaccuracy

    2. Half yearly IB notifications

      3. It was remarked that there was a delay in receiving these. The only delays we can envisage are when notification has been incorrectly addressed or forwarded to the joint IP etc.

      ACTION: CAU to feed into April 2001 User Group to assess what solution users want.

    3. Amended IB notices following changes to IB

    It was commented on that IB notifications were not always sent out when interest changed.

    ACTION: Procedures are already in force and CAU management to remind staff that they be followed.

  1. INVESTMENTS

    2. It is difficult to analyse the results of this because the low satisfaction rating could be linked to the low importance rating. However, a comment was made on the timeliness of the written notification. Procedures will be reviewed.

    ACTION: CAU management to review procedures

    1. Treasury Bills

    Some IP’s stated that they would like more information on Treasury Bills.

    ACTION: CAU to add detail to its literature by 30 June 2001.

  2. CASHIERS

    1. Foreign cheques

      2. The delay in receiving sterling equivalents of foreign currencies was highlighted, and the fact that notification of the transfer was never received. CAU rely on the Bank of England to deal with the foreign exchange but accept that we should advise the IP of the likely timescale.

      ACTION: CAU to advise IPs of the timescale imposed by the Bank of England

    2. Bank Giro Credit Slips

      3. It was suggested that the space for the account number be changed to incorporate sub accounts and separate accounts etc.which may reduce the need for reconciliation further down the line. There are banking constrains on the space available for additions to the slips, however the design will be reviewed.

      ACTION: CAU unable to effect change as the aspect of layout complained of is specifically required by existing banking rules

    3. Payments by standing order

ACTION: CAU to feed into April 2001 User Group to assess what solution users want.

Customer Survey Contents

[INTRODUCTION] [GENERAL CONTEXT] [PERFORMANCE CRITERIA] [CAU FUNCTIONS] [SATISFACTION WITH STANDARD FORMS] [EXCHANGE VISITS] [BI-ANNUAL STATEMENTS] [IMPROVED SERVICES] [COMPLAINTS (& Complaints Procedure)] [GENERAL COMMENTS] [ANNEX A – Action Plan]

[IP Banking Home]
[General Information] [Organisation] [Contacts] [Telephone List] [IP Banking User Guide] [BACS] [IP Banking User Group] 
[IP Banking Customer Survey Results] [Frequently Asked Questions] [Table of Fees] [Statement Request] 
[General Request]

  Disclaimer | Information Charter / Privacy Statement | Complaints Procedure | Crown Copyright 2024