Forum: Make it much easier to speak to a person on a hotline

When calling a hotline, much has been said about long waits and interactive voice response systems.

But a deeper issue is whether customers are given a reasonably visible route to speak to a human officer.

Institutions may point to a hotline, digital portal or helpdesk as proof that assistance is available. But fair dealing should be judged not only by whether a channel exists on paper, but also by whether an ordinary customer can find and use that channel when he needs clarification or urgent help.

This matters most when customers are under stress and trying to resolve a problem. If the path to a human officer is buried within layers of prompts and becomes apparent only after a long sequence of automated options, many would conclude that no real avenue for help exists.

A channel that is technically available but practically obscured raises questions of accessibility, transparency and fairness.

I encountered this when trying to resolve a credit card matter. I learnt of the option to speak to an officer only after visiting a bank branch, where a staff member showed me how to reach it through the hotline.

The wider issue is not one bank or one hotline. It is whether service architecture is judged by what exists on paper rather than what is accessible in practice. If fair dealing is to have practical meaning, it should extend to the design of customer contact channels, especially where customers are seeking clarification or assistance.

Institutions should review their customer channels based on discoverability, not just existence. Regulators should also consider whether hidden contact pathways are consistent with fair dealing.

A support channel should not require insider guidance before help can be reached.

Lim Seow Ling