Blades bottom of the fan care table

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Balham

S24SU Seer
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
10,520
Reaction score
18,821
Location
Teddington
According to a Football Supporters Federation report, United scored 0 out of 35 for customer care.

Thought Richard Batho had been appointed to sort this out?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/9424828.stm

Each club's charter was given a 0-5 rating in seven categories: accessibility, timeliness, quality, clarity of complaints procedure, appeals process and contact details for the relevant league and Independent Football Ombudsman (IFO)...
In the Championship, Ipswich Town scored 32, Derby County 31 and Norwich City 29, but Sheffield United matched Everton's mark of zero.
 

Fairly sure Mr Batho was appointed after the survey had taken place.

However, think this is something that the club should look into with great importance. Noticed that this looks into the Fan Charter. There's one thing on there i'd like changing.....the fact the club have the right to change both kits every season. Can we get back to changing one kit every other season!
 
I'm always sceptical of surveys and box-ticking exercises.

A zero mark is ludicrous. Who are the Football Supporters Federation anyway?
 
A zero mark is ludicrous.

Agreed.

Are they ONLY reviewing the charter?

Be interesting, for example, to see how they decided we deserved a zero for 'contact details' if they're looking at service as a whole (which would be the meaningful thing to do). From our homepage, it's 'Club\Contacts' to get to the details most people would need, including a general equiries number.
 
Not if we don't have a customers charter, which would beg the question as to why we don't have one.

It is, but to review that in isolation seems a bit perverse. Surely you try to rate the ACTUAL service, not just the bit of documentation that describes the service you should get.
 
I am highly sceptical of customers' charters, mission statements, and the like.

They are basically PR exercises, often with a bit of political correctness thrown in.

The proof of the pudding is what the bodies deliver, and that's not necessarily about ticking boxes. Surveys can easily be fiddled. Just look at hospital waiting lists.
 
They are basically PR exercises, often with a bit of political correctness thrown in.

I don't think they're entirely that. In a good organisation they're what you're held to account for (which is a good thing). But they aren't really used by customers as a catalogue of services, and they aren't an integral part of what a customer experiences when they go through the process of buying a ticket, getting a refund, asking for help: in short, the bread and butter of what customer care is about.

The important things are the people on the end of the phone, the website that you go and try and find contact details on, the help you get when you have lost a season ticket etc..... And the FSF seem to have circumvented all that.
 
I don't think they're entirely that. In a good organisation they're what you're held to account for (which is a good thing). But they aren't really used by customers as a catalogue of services, and they aren't an integral part of what a customer experiences when they go through the process of buying a ticket, getting a refund, asking for help: in short, the bread and butter of what customer care is about.

The important things are the people on the end of the phone, the website that you go and try and find contact details on, the help you get when you have lost a season ticket etc..... And the FSF seem to have circumvented all that.

Agreed.

Mick Rooker alone must be worth a few points!
 
A while back I did some work with Lincoln City. The way in which their switchboard dealt with my calls was appalling compared to the treatment we get at the Lane - so I'd find it hard to believe we're bottom.
 
A while back I did some work with Lincoln City. The way in which their switchboard dealt with my calls was appalling compared to the treatment we get at the Lane - so I'd find it hard to believe we're bottom.

The BBC report only mentioned Premier League and Championship teams. I'd agree with most of the points on here but it will be interesting to see whether a Fans' Charter appears on the OS at some point soon.

It appears it's been there since November 2010. Where was the FSF looking??
 
Fair play to the FSF for having a bash at though I agree that charters aren't necessarily the best indicator of how an organisation is actually treating it's customers.

like most the main times I have to deal with the club organisation and sample its customer service is when buying tickets.

I have given up on the online system - I registered then it said I hadn't then there was a cock up with customer numbers - it's been going on for years and I resent paying an 0871 number when I ring to sort it out.

I also resent the 0871 number to buy a ticket when you have to pay extra to be put on hold for ages for the privilege of buying a ticket for which you will also be charged a booking fee.

Yes it's a business and all that and I do have a bit of a thing about companies that use 0871 numbers but surely there's a better way.

I know people will say that 'True Blades' would be happy to pay extra on top of ticket prices and piss about with crappy online systems but I'm afraid I'm one of the 5,000 to 10,000 'Not True Blades' who like McCabe doesn't go to every match any more.
 

SUFC Shit at customer care? In other breaking news theres a bit of a problem in Tokyo.
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom