Publicly humiliated by supermarket.

[redcogs]

Shifting the focus of responsibility away from the immediate source and cause of the humiliation does not serve the consumers interests. The supermarket managers assumption was that the customers account could not pay for the goods being purchased. He indicated as much, and he did so in a crowded public environment. He had alternatives available to him. He could have accepted the Mrs redcogs explanation that "there must be some mistake" and reacted sympathetically in the way I have suggested above. He did not.

 

It is fair to assume that the technological breakdown which created this situation may not have been the direct responsibility of the supermarket, and that other agencies were involved. but if so, they were not responsible for generating humiliation. The supermarket manager was.

 

I am not clear as to why anyone could believe that a telephone call fielder for a remote bank or an equally remote streamline operator could in any way be held to account for humiliating a supermarket customer? They were not present in the supermarket, and as far as I know, they did not make any assumptions about the ability of a customer to pay for their goods.

[perplexity]

At no stage did he suggest that the shopping trolley was put aside for later payment, and his clear assumption was that "the problem is at your end", not the more acceptable 'I'm ever so sorry, there appears to be a problem with the technology, which is no ones fault, but as soon as this mess is sorted your shopping will be available to you, and your custom is valued to us'.

 

----

 

I am picturing a queue of shoppers all waiting patiently to check out while an argument ensues at the till. I have seen that often enough in a supermarket while an idiot with the problem to solve (or some gossip to share) is not at all in so much of hurry and with no apology of any sort to be made at the end of it, to those who had to wait.

 

I am not saying that this is what happened, but in all seriousness and with all due respect, I am not even slightly surprised if the manager of a supermarket would rather not have a trolley full of shopping sitting about while a shopper runs off to fetch the cash.

 

"Justice" implies that all are treated in the same way, hence the need to anticipate the situation were they all to be encouraged to expect as much. Nothing about this would put me off shopping at that particular Supermarket, rather the opposite, nor am I yet so sure that a bank was to blame.

 

8)

[redcogs]

One suggests that humiliation is an irrelevance (its all in the mind..). One suggests that the customer is responsible for inaccurately keying a wrong number or for failing to remember her keycode.

 

Where the One that accepts the scenario as described? Where the One that understands the supermarket managers responsibility to react appropriately and in a non judgemental way?

[perplexity]

"humiliation is in the mind of the complainant" infers that there would appear to be no particular negligence, failure of duty or breach of contract sufficient to act against, which appears to be the case.

 

"Negligence", by the way, would mean that something should have been done to avoid the event that was not done. Whether or not a legitimate decision pleased a customer is another matter.

 

Managers are paid to manage, which is to act in a judgemental way. They also have to hire or fire the staff from time to time and there is not so much for a manager to have to do that is more judgemental than that. This is life.

 

8)

[redcogs]

Now I see perplexity, its a "I was only doing my job" type situation - a phrase used down the ages as a cover for all types of behaviour ranging from publicly humiliating a womann and her child at a supermarket til (when a clear and better alternative behaviour form was available), right the way through to unspeakable horrors in unmentionable circumstances.

 

Do you think I may be in the wrong place to ask for sensible consumer advice and a sympathetic ear? All you have offered so far is a kind of victim blaming management speak. I can detect no recognition of the low status that a consumer has in the real world.

[perplexity]

 

The Queen of England consumes.

 

With status in mind I would go to a posh shop in the high street and pay the premium price. Customer service anywhere is much the same as anything else; you get what you pay for.

 

[Westmeand Fan]

I work in a supermarket and sometimes situations like this arise, i have had to deal with difficult customers regarding this issue and some of them are never happy with what you suggest and they think its our problem when sometimes as another member has said its the network that rejects the transaction.

 

I have had a customer try and put a complaint in about me when this sort of situation happened, a few months ago when a transation was declined, we tried to see if there was an alternative which was whether they had another method of payment or we could put the items aside if they agreed for a short period of time and they come back but the problem with that is if there are cold/frozen items these need to be put back or they go off and if its busy with people waiting this takes time and then they will start having a go at you so you never win. Well back to what happened in my situation they was not happy and said it was not there problem and wanted the shoppig for nothing, of course this was not going to happen. They went storming off and came back later and paid via cash, with no apology for there rudness.

 

Couldn't your wife have said to the manager to hold the items and go and get money to pay for the goods, from my opinion you are overreacting about this i know loads of people have been in this situation and i wouldn't really worry about what other people from your local community thinks.