Tag Archives: customer service impacts

You can’t make an omlette with out breaking a few Eggs

A correspondent in the field, Nic Jefferis has sent in this story about how a “database glitch” has affected customers of the Egg on-line bank who have been trying to pay their bills using their NatWest debit cards.

The BBC describes the problem very succintly:

“The problem is that the Egg website does not recognise Natwest Visa Debit cards as being legitimate cards.”

The root cause seems to stem from the fact that key base data used by Egg’s on-line bank, the valid set of Bank Identification Numbers, appears to to not include NatWest Visa debit cards as they are only being rolled out at the moment to replace the existing Maestro Debit card facility currently in use at NatWest.

And at this point the second common component of IQTrainwrecks raises its head – who is responsible for the data.

Egg get their data from Experian. As soon as the problem arose, Egg contacted Experian to get a solution.  Natwest state that they were “aware of this problem and raised it with Egg at the outset” and were waiting for Egg to sort out the problem in their systems.

Somewhere in the process for maintaining BIN master data something has gone awry which has affected the ability of NatWest customers to pay bills using their new Visa debit cards. As the problem appears to be in the underlying base data, it is possible that there are impacts wider afield than just Egg’s payment systems.

As a source quoted in the BBC report says, this should be a straightforward process and an error like this would be highly unusual. But as we know here at IQTrainwrecks, it is often the simple errors that can have the biggest knock on impacts in downstream systems and processes resulting in loss, damage, injury, or frustration.

Apple App Store IQ Trainwreck

It appears that Apple iPhone App developers are having difficulty getting paid at the moment, according to this story from The Register. (Gizmodo.com carries the story here, Techcrunch.com has it here,

According to The Register:

A backlog in Apple’s payment processing system has left some iPhone developers still waiting for February’s payments, leaving some at risk of bankruptcy and considering legal action against the lads in Cupertino.

Desperate developers have been told to stop e-mailing the iTunes finance system and to wait patiently for their money – in some cases tens of thousands of dollars – while Apple sorts things out.

It would appear from comments and coverage elsewhere that this problem has been occurring for some developers for longer (since late 2008 according to the TechCrunch article and this article from eequalsmcsquare.com (an iphone community site))

The article goes on to explain that:

According to postings on the iPhone developer community Apple has been blaming bank errors and processing problems for the delays. Complainants are being told that payments have been made, that bank errors have caused rejections[.]

One commenter on the story on The Register, commenting anonymously, attempts to shed some light on this with an explanation that, from an Information Quality point of view, sounds plausible.

  • Two American banks merged (was it Washington Mutual and Chase?) and the SWIFT code for the customers of one had to change. The bank didn’t tell the customers and Apple had the payments refused. Apple seem to be manually changing the codes in the payment system, but that’s separate from the web interface where devs enter their bank details.
  • A lot of American banks don’t have SWIFT codes at all. Royalties from e.g. EU sales are sent from Apple (Luxembourg) S.A.. The chances of this money arriving at Bank Of Smalltown seem slim at best.

This what we have here is a failure to manage master data correctly it seems, and also a glaring case of potentially incomplete data which would impact the ability for funds to flow freely from the App Store to the Developers.

The Anonymous commenter’s explanation would seem to hold water because Apple are claiming that “bank errors have caused rejections”. Having had some experience with electronic funds transfer processes, one of the reasons a funds transfer would fail would be if the data used was incorrect, inconsistent or inaccurate. This would happen if the SWIFT codes of Bank A had to change (or if Bank A and Bank B had to have new codes issued).

However, some commenters based in the EU have reported that they have given Apple updated bank details and are still awaiting payment, which suggests there may be yet another potential root cause at play here that may yet come to light.

Apple still owes me more than $7,500 since September 2008 for US and World regions. I supplied them with a new SWIFT code and a intermediary bank they could use last month, but still nothing. Sent them tons of emails but I never got to know what is really wrong/faulty so I just tried to give them another SWIFT code that DNB (Biggest bank in Norway) uses. All other region payments have been OK.” (quote from comment featured on this article)

So, for the potential impact on iPhone Apps developers cash flow, and the PR impact on one of Apple’s flagship services, and the fact that management of the accuracy, completeness and consistency of key master data for a process, this counts as an IQ Trainwreck.

I am who I am, except when I’m not.

Steve Tuck, writing over at SmartDataCollective, shares a tale of an embarassing IQTrainwreck involving his brother. The root cause of Steve’s tale is ‘false positives’ in matching, but it goes to show how simple assumptions or errors in the management of the quality of information can lead to unforeseen and undesired consequences.

Steve’s brother had checked into a hotel for a trade conference. He went and had a shower and was quite surprised to come out of the bathroom to find another man standing in his room. It turned out that they both had the same name and were both attending the same event and the hotel had (despite all the other evidence to the contrary, like different companies and different credit card details) decided to merge the two reservations so two people wound up being booked into the same room.

The second Mr Tuck had to take his bags and go to a different hotel in the end, causing unnecessary aggravation for him (it is always nice to be staying in the hotel a conference is on in… the more relaxed pace over breakfast can help ease you into the day). Steve’s brother had the embarassment of being caught in little more than a towel.

For the embarassment factor and customer service impacts, this meets the criteria for an IQ Trainwreck. 

Thanks Steve.

This isn’t the first time we’ve covered this type of false positive IQ Trainwreck though. A scan of our archives brings up this story from 2007.