Bank vs Seabee

Continuing with the bank story, this morning I decided to see whether the PIN given to me by the bank which said it was for the new ATM card was actually for the new credit card.

Following instructions from the machine I put the credit card in, pressed 'Other Services', pressed 'Change PIN', keyed in the PIN they'd given me, keyed in the new one I wanted.

Did as I was told and keyed it in again, then again keyed in the one they'd given me.

Waited.

'Transaction complete'.

Waited a bit longer to see if it contradicted itself as it had yesterday.

Nothing.

Bloody hell, I'd done it!

I now had a PIN I wanted on my credit card.

Mind you, I don't trust the machine so I won't bother to try to use it. I'll just do the old signature thing.

I thought maybe I was on a winning streak so I decided to give the ATM card a go, just to see if it was working and if I could withdraw cash.

Not sure about the PIN though. Would it be the one I had on my previous card or would it be the new one they'd sent me?

I keyed in my original number.

'The number is incorrect please try again.'

I tried the new number they'd sent me.

'The number is incorrect please try again'

Aha. They were getting their own back because I'd just managed a hassle-free successful transaction.

I suspect that if you beat the system by managing that, the system goes to Red Alert mode and you go on a watch list. 'A customer has made a successful transaction without any aggravation. Flag him'.

I pulled my card out of the machine and the retribution started. 'This machine is temporarily out of order'.

So it wasn't going to let me try again. (My apologies to any other HSBC customers who now can't use the ATM near Spinneys in Dubai Marina)

A bit later I was up in Jumeirah 1 and I remembered there's an ATM in Spinneys' entrance.

I put my card in and the screen welcomed me by name.

I keyed in my original PIN, pressed the appropriate links.

'Card retained. Please contact the Bank'  (Their capital B, not mine)

Yep, it identified me, snatched my card from me and wouldn't give it back.

I called the Bank. Naturally the machine at the other end started asking for things: 'Key in your ten digit personal banking number'.

Yeah right, I always make sure before I leave home that I have all my ten digit, twelve digit and sixteen digit bank and card numbers with me.

Went home, spread all the papers with numbers on them (do you know how many different numbers a bank gives you?) over the desk and called the Bank again.

The machine made the usual demands for ten, twelve, sixteen digit numbers relating to accounts, cards, personal banking, phone banking.

Somewhere in the middle of it all I thought I heard something about 'alternative'. I hit the star key, then whatever numbers it told me to hit and I was in a queue to talk to...wait for it.....a person.

I got the inevitable stuff about 'all our customer service (sic) officers are busy' and I was even told I'd been put in the priority queue (hollow laugh from me of course).

Then the machine told me that 'Our Customer Service (sic) Centre is available 24 hours a day. You can continue to hold or please call us later'

I held and not too many minutes later a human being spoke to me.

I'm sorry I didn't note her name because she was actually lucid and helpful. I explained the situation and that I wanted a new card issued. She said she would arrange it and that she had cancelled the card the machine had snatched from me.

So today has confirmed the cause of the problem, vague and incorrect information in the material sent by the bank, and what actually needs to be done.

The PIN they sent which says in three places that it's for the ATM card is actually for the credit card.

The statement on the instructions with the ATM card that you can only change the PIN at any HSBC ATM is incorrect.

The sticker that says 'Please call 800 etc to select your PIN' actually means you must call that number, there is no other way.

Smack into the wall

Back in Dubai and I inevitably smashed straight into the wall of frustration.

Sorry but I need to get it off my chest. After all, what's a blog for if it isn't to let off steam. (Feel free to leave at this point before I start).

The first and worst frustration is the bank. No surprise there then for anyone living in the UAE.

Two days of incompetence, of stupidity, of false information, of bank-built barriers to prevent the customer doing the simplest thing. I swear they do it deliberately to make us go away, to stop us asking them for anything.

And I'm still only at the begining of trying to do one very simple thing with them.

Here's the story so far:

I arrived back in Dubai to find a new credit card and new Debit/ATM card waiting for me.

With the Debit/ATM card is a sealed envelope containing a PIN. On the outside it says "Debit/ATM Card PIN."

Inside it says "...PIN to access Debit Card/ATM services..."

Next to the PIN it says "...PIN for Debit Card/ATM Services."

I assumed that means the PIN relates to the Debit/ATM card.

Foolish of me of course, that's apparently not what it means at all.

It tells me to change the PIN, "which can only be done at all HSBC ATM's in the UAE."

There's a sticker on the card itself that tells me to call an 800 number "to select your PIN."  Not a good sign, starting with a contradiction. Only at an ATM...or alternatively by phoning.

I'll be passing an HSBC ATM so I decide to do it there.

Following the prompts I put my Debit/ATM card into the slot, then key in the PIN they've given me. Then I key in the PIN I want to change to.

As requested, I re-key in the PIN I want to change to and I re-key in the PIN they've given me. It tells me the transaction has been successful.

Then it changes its mind and tells me the transaction has failed and I should go to a counter.

I go to a counter.

The cashier tells me I'm using the wrong card, I should have put in my credit card.

I point out that all this PIN stuff came with the Debit/ATM card and that's what it says all over the envelope.

He shrugs and gets on with some important paperwork.

HSBC customer service personified.

I walk steam away, fuming.

I come back and recheck all the paperwork. No, nothing about PINs on the credit card paperwork, the PIN all relates to the Debit/ATM card.

Today I think I'll give the 800 number a try.

Unbelieveable.

You're being talked to by a computer of course, so you have to wait for it to tell you what to do, key in whatever it demands before it moves on to its next demand.

What they haven't bothered to tell me in advance is that I'll need lots of information at my fingertips to be able to advance through the phone call.

How hard is that? While telling me to call the number to select my PIN they could so very easily have said "you will need the following information".

Here's how the one-way 'conversation' goes:

Please wait while we identify your contact number.

I wait.

To continue in English  press 1.

I press 1.

Please key in the last six digits of your primary bank account number or primary card number.

(Dash away to find the numbers, come back and redial. Start all over again).

Please wait while we identify your contact number.

I wait.

To continue in English press 1.

I press 1.

Please key in the last six digits of your primary bank account number or primary card number followed by the hash key.

I obey.

Please key in your full ten digit personal banking number or your full twelve digit bank account number or your full sixteen digit primary card number followed by the hash key.

Scramble for bits of paper trying to find numbers, count the digits to see if I've got the right one. Too late, the computer has lost patience with me and cancelled the call.

Redial and start again.

Please wait while we identify your contact number.

I wait.


To continue in English press 1.

I press 1. 

Please key in the last six digits of your primary bank account number or primary card number followed by the hash key.

I comply.

Please key in your full ten digit personal banking umber or your full twelve digit bank account number or your full sixteen digit primary card number followed by the hash key.

I obey.

We're sorry, the number you've entered doesn't match our records. Please try again.

I do. Very carefully. Digit by digit.

We're sorry, the number you've entered doesn't match our records.

You probably heard the phone slamming down over in Sharjah.

So HSBC wins again. I've done what they always intended me to do, give up, go away and leave them alone.


Now for something completely different, let me tell you about the customer service we enjoyed in one of our ubiquitous franchise restaurants food factories last evening.

The waiter was friendly, pleasant, doing his job to the best of his ability and let me say that I don't for one second criticise him for his lack of English. That's the fault of his employer. People employed in customer service here need to speak English because of our diverse population. But that's not something that concerns the people who employ them, they just bring in job-lots of bodies. Why would it matter if they can't actually give the service customers expect.

We'd been shopping and stopped at Noodle Factory in Dubai Marina Mall for a quick meal.

One of the dishes includes mixed peppers, which we don't like. Mrs Seabee asks the waiter to get the chef to change the peppers for a different vegetable.

Blank look.

Repeat the request worded slightly differently.

Still a blank look.

Try again, in pidgin English.

He sort of gets part of it because he carefully explains that, yes, the mixed peppers come with the chicken.

We try again. Yes we understand that but maybe the chef could replace the peppers with broccoli?

He tells us if we want extra broccoli we have to pay extra.

It's soon after my HSBC run-in and I get very close to losing my temper.

Through gritted teeth and perhaps a little louder than I would normally speak I suggest he just brings whatever he wants to bring.

We push the mixed peppers to one side and eat the meat, vegetable-less.



It's all so unnecessary. Doing the right thing, running a business competently, making it easy for customers to do business with you isn't actually very difficult.

But here there's a universal wilful insistance on doing it the wrong way, running businesses incompetently, making it hard for customers to do business with them.

And I haven't even mentioned their websites.


There, I feel a bit better now. I knew I would.

Benihana Kuwait's blogger attack

Here's the review that resulted in a blogger being sued for damages:


My Benihana Experience












A few days back I posted about Benihana opening up at the Avenues and yesterday night I decided to pass by with Nat and try it out. The service wasn’t too bad for a restaurant that’s just been open for a few days and the staff were really friendly. The restaurant itself is made up of islands and bars with a grill in the middle of each one. You sit around the grill and the chef will come to your table and prepare the food right in front of you which makes things entertaining. It’s actually why I prefer sitting at the bar in Japanese restaurants in general, since you can talk to the chef and watch them put your dish together. The problem with my experience last night though was with the food, it was disappointing to say the least.

We ordered beef negimayaki for starters followed by an Orange Blossom maki and a Hibachi Chicken. The negimaki arrived looking good and was probably the best thing we had there even though I prefer Maki’s negimaki which has a richer teriyaki sauce. The Orange Blossom was very ordinary, wouldn’t order it again. Now the Hibachi chicken which is basically grilled chicken, that was the worst. The chicken was very chewy (I could swear it was undercooked if not raw) and tasted terrible. Even after I had the chef add some more teriyaki sauce in hopes of improving the taste it didn’t work. I tried to dip it into the sauces that came with the chicken but it was hard to figure out if they were actually making things worse or not. Nat only ate one piece of chicken and left the rest while I needed my protein since I’m on a strict diet and forced myself to eat my whole plate (I can do that) but the after taste was really bad. Even the rice and the veggies that came with it tasted bad AND were under cooked. Once we left I considered picking up a frozen yogurt from Pinkberry even though I hate frozen yogurts but I just needed something to get rid of the aftertaste. A few moments later we ended up at Chocolate Bar ordering the gooey chocolate cake (bye bye diet).

I shot the two videos above of the chef preparing our meal. Benihana are known for the live shows they perform when preparing your dish so I was expecting to see [This] but ended up with the above . Would I go back to Benihana? No I wouldn’t. Their sashimi and maki’s are pretty cheap (KD1.5 for 5 pieces of Salmon sashimi for example) but there are two other Japanese restaurants at the Avenues, Wasabi and Maki, and I would prefer either one of those to Benihana.




(You can read the original post here. )

There won't be many internet users who aren't aware that Kuwait-based blogger Mark is being sued by Benihana Kuwait for writing that review of his experience in their restaurant.

In spite of universal negative reaction, franchisee Benihana Kuwait is continuing with its legal attack. The franchiser Benihana of Tokyo has taken the decision to hide and pretend it isn't happening, isn't damaging their brand.

Benihana Inc, a separate company, has spoken out, issuing a press release distancing themselves from the debacle, saying they welcomed customer feedback and advising people to 'share your comments and opinions directly with Benihana of Tokyo, Inc'.

I originally posted about it here, under the heading 'Sued for saying he didn't like his meal'.

I also said in an update post that it was a balanced review and along with many other bloggers today, I'm reproducing it.

The reason this is being re-posted today by many people on various internet platforms is to continue to draw attention to the attack on freedom of speech.

There's nothing in the review to warrant such an attack.

Read the blogs, the tweets, the Facebook comments - the damage to Benihana is being done by the actions of the Kuwait franchisee and by Benihana of Tokyo themselves by their silence.  Just google benihana kuwait or on Twitter look for  #BenihanaKUW to see what's being said.

Benihana can begin to repair the damage they've created for themselves by announcing that they are dropping the legal action.

Benihana Kuwait update

You surely must know that the big story in cyberspace is Benihana Kuwait, that's the Japanese-style restaurant franchise, suing a Kuwaiti blogger because, in what is a balanced review, he said he didn't like the food and wouldn't go back.

In my post on Monday I said the story needs to get as much exposure on the 'net as we can give it, and I urged other bloggers and social media users to expose these people.

You could hardly have done better!

It's all over cyberspace and now all sorts of media is picking up the story and joining in the universal condemnation of the crass stupidity.

There've been a couple of recent developments.

Michael Kata, COO and Executive Vice President of Benihana of Tokyo, who license the Kuwaiti franchise, told boingboing.net that the franchise agreement didn't allow them to order franchisees to sue or withdraw lawsuits, but that they were empowered to terminate the agreement should the franchisee bring the brand into disrepute.


As I said on Monday, that's exactly what they should have done. It'll be interesting to see what the franchiser does.

The other development is a press release from the other half of the company, Benihana Inc. in Miami.

Obviously concerned at the effect of the stupidity on investors in their company, they're distancing themselves as far as they can from it.

Absolutely nothing to do with us, they say. There are two totally separate companies and we have no control or authority over what the other company does.

They take a dig at the franchisee, saying their half of the company seriously consider all feedback an opportunity for improving operations and We encourage you to share your opinions and comments directly with Benihana of Tokyo, Inc. The company's contact information is available on www.BenihanaGroup.com.

They're well aware what a storm the stupidity has created and that there's universal condemnation, and they clearly want us to let the franchiser know our feelings directly. The full press release is here.

By the way, if you haven't started at the beginning of this story, the original post with the restaurant review is here.

Like me, I don't think you'll see anything in the review that relates to the claims made in the lawsuit. The words Mark uses have no connection with the claims made in the writ.

boingboing have a translation, which includes: "And so, we order the payment of KD5001 as a compensation for the damages caused to the restaurant management and for encouraging large number of customers not to try the restaurant by insulting, doubting the quality and food served by Benihana and using expressions that disgust people from trying the food. The person has caused huge material damages to the restaurant, ethic damage to the restaurant's reputation as an international brand that has chains all over the world as well as hurt the restaurant's potential to expand in Kuwait by influencing all kinds of nationalities not to try a restaurant that offers a specific type of food that is subject to taste preference.

If anyone should be sued for causing 'ethic damage to the restaurant's reputation' it's their own management.

Sued for saying he didn't like his meal.

In case you've missed it I have to draw your attention to a post by Alexander on Fake Plastic Souks.

Briefly, a Kuwaiti blogger posted a restaurant review, in which he gave a couple of positive comments but said he was unimpressed with the food and wouldn't go back.

Fair enough, you'd think.

I'll quote a few lines from Alex's post:

And then there's the comment from a geezer called Mike Servo, who claimed to be the general manager of the Benihana management of Kuwait and who threatened to sue Mark.


"...our rights and name is being used in a wrong way and broadcasting the video without a proper consent from us is really annoying specially Benihana is just opened up its doors to the public. We are seeking and consulting our legal dept. on how we can form a type of law suit against your website to be brought up to the Kuwait authorities."


He goes on to trill: "We want you to give us your information, your name, your number and your address so our lawyer will take it from there and be sure that you in Kuwait were the jury is 100 % clean and fair."

Mark posted up on Twitter yesterday that he had received the lawsuit. Benihana Kuwait actually went ahead and sued a blogger for writing a bad review of their restaurant.

It's something that infuriates me. Justifiable criticism from a customer and a company rushes to the legal system.

Benihana HQ needs to look at this seriously and quickly because the action by their Kuwaiti franchisee is bringing their brand into disrepute.

In my opinion the unprofessional, unbusinesslike action needs to get as much exposure on the 'net as we can give it, which is why I've repeated the story here. I hope you other bloggers and social media users will expose these people too.



PS an hour later.

Just before shutting down and heading off to the airport I thought I'd see what cyberspace had on this. Bloggers, Twitter, Facebook - have a look folks. Benihana Kuwait have created a PR disaster for themselves. All their own work.

I wonder if they're beginning to understand how business works in the real world. You know, the place where customers have a say too. Where bullying and threatening creates a backlash.

If you are beginning to understand it, it's too late guys, you've damaged the brand already. You've poured ridicule on your own brand.

More Metro nonsense

A problem that shouldn't have happened, no information for those affected, waffle that insults our intelligence from the official spokesman.

Situation normal then.

The Metro had another technical fault yesterday, this time to do with the signals the trains send back to the computer, so trains were stopped on most of the system for three to four hours.

Inevitably, passengers complain that they were given no information, had no idea what was happening, they were just shuttled about on buses.

Lack of communication is exactly what I complained about last week, when the Metro's last 'technical issue' inconvenienced passengers but they were told nothing.

Seven new stations were opened on Friday and additional trains were added. You'd assume that it would all be tested and any problems fixed before the public was invited to use it. Yet it all ground to a halt during peak time.

But according to Pehyman Younes Parham, Director of Marketing and Communication for the RTA, such technical issues are normal and to be expected.

Oh really.

It's just the same old comment that's been used before, an insult to our intelligence repeated yet again to explain away a problem that should not have occurred.

Last week's technical issues were to be expected too, according to Mr Parham after that episode.

I realise it's alien thinking to companies here but what I think should be 'normal and to be expected' is that technical issues are all sorted out before something is opened to the public.

The Metro system is closed for seven hours during weekday nights and for fifteen hours Thursay/Friday. Time enough, I would have thought, for the necessary testing to be carried out, any glitches fixed and the system running efficiently before the public was encouraged to use the new stations and extra trains.


I've always thought that the worst thing any company can do is set the bar for achievement so low that the target is 'we're no worse than anyone else'. I was reminded of this during Mr Parham's interview on DubaiEye radio this morning.

He began by saying that the Metro has been benchmarked against other similar systems around the world and guess what - we're no worse than them.

That's OK then, if that's the lofty goal that's been set.

Then the old 'it's to be expected' excuse was trotted out yet again to explain away the problem.

On behalf of several listeners who complained about the total lack of communication he was asked what the RTA had done to tell inconvenienced passengers what was going on. He took the time-honoured route and ignored the question, waffling on about something entirely different for a couple of minutes.

In true UAE journalistic style the question wasn't repeated and he wasn't pushed for an answer.

The answer I suppose comes from the passengers - nothing was done to tell them what was going on.

True to the Dubai customer service ethic, something is opened before it's ready, infuriated customers are given no information at the time they're being inconvenienced, then are later told it's all perfectly normal.

Gulf News has the report here.

Getting the easiest part wrong

I never cease to be amazed that the simplest part of any problem is so consistently mishandled by companies.

It's always been the same, they never learn and I don't expect they ever will.

The easiest part is communication.

Tell the people affected what the problem is, what you're doing to correct it and, if possible, when you expect the problem to be rectified and service back to normal.

How hard is that?

For some inexplicable reason it's so hard it's impossible.

We've had it throughout the volcano ash cloud chaos, the biggest complaint from people, as always, is the lack of communication, lack of information.

Dubai's Metro is at it again too.

Passengers using the Dubai Metro once again faced delays yesterday following a disruption, which was not explained by the Metro operators.

However, what frustrated the passengers the most were confusing announcements made inside the trains and by ill-informed staff at the stations.

Situation perfectly normal then.

Metro operations remained suspended once again for around 50 minutes after 12:15pm on Sunday and then around 3pm while passengers wondered what had happened.

Leaving passengers stranded with no information makes it impossible for them to know what to do. Do they stay in the station and wait for an unknown amount of time or do they make other arrangements to get to their destination?

They can't make the decision thanks to the lack of communication from the Metro operators. Even worse, they're getting the usual 'five minutes' rubbish from staff.

How many times have I been told 'five minutes', or 'take a seat, coming'. It's just a way of getting rid of you, to stop you pestering them.

It's typical too of the 'customer service' we've come to expect. Take your money and that's it, nothing after that is of any concern to the company.

The problem was later explained with the usual platitudes.

A Dubai Roads and Transport Authority (RTA) spokesperson said that technical issues were behind the slight disruptions.

"We are preparing to add more trains with the opening of new stations from April 30" said Peyman Younes Parham, director of marketing and communication at the RTA.

"Techical issues are being sorted out, especially regarding the train headways and waiting time of passengers and this has led to some delays. It is quite normal when you add more services on a running track."

Why didn't you tell your passengers that? Why weren't your staff briefed? Did it happen unexpectedly - your statement 'it's perfectly normal' indicates it didn't? So why no advance notice?

If it was unexpected, why wasn't information put on the electronic boards and the public announcement system?





The story's here.

Officials and the law

We poke fun at the well-established procedure of a major policy change being announced only to be later 'clarified' - which means cancelled.

I did that in my last post, about the ban-then-no-ban on alcohol being used in restaurant recipes.

But there's a very serious issue involved, one that was raised in the 'clarification' of the alcohol confusion.

That issue is 'officials' far exceeding their authority and believing they have the authority to, in effect, make new laws.

Only government can write laws. As Dubai Municipality's 'clarification' said, DM alone does not have the authority to issue such a ban, of alcohol, it must pass through a number of governmental authorities.

It certainly isn't within the authority of one 'official' to write laws, as has happened so many times.

We've seen it previously with tourist visas, property residence visas, ID cards, the pork ban/no ban...

Seems to me there's a need for clear directives to 'officials' telling them that they must work within the laws as they stand, and explaining to them how far their authority extends.

I can't believe how stupid we are!

Last week a new directive was sent to hotels by Dubai Municipality:

"Use of alcohol in preparation and cooking of food is strictly prohibited. Display and sale of food products containing alcohol as an ingredient is strictly prohibited," said the circular, seen by The National.

As I posted on Sunday, after confusion in the industry a 'clarification' was promised for Tuesday.

The 'clarification' has been duly issued, when the Director of the Food Control Department at Dubai Municipality said that the circular was misunderstood.

It said: "Use of alcohol in preparation and cooking of food is strictly prohibited."

I just don't understand how the media and the industry could be stupid enough to think that it meant that the use of alcohol in preparation and cooking of food is strictly prohibited.

To clear up our confusion and misunderstanding the new statement actually has two 'clarifications'.

One, the use of alcohol in preparation and cooking of food is not prohibited.

Two, DM alone does not have the authority to issue such a ban anyway, it must pass through a number of governmental authorities.

The 'clarification' says that food containing alcohol must be treated in much the same way as pork - handled separately and clearly labelled.

As I've said several times before, we really should pay more attention to what we're being told. The authorities have enough work to do without constantly having to clarify things we've got wrong.



Here it is in The National and Gulf News.

Did 'Dubai' do it?

I've been reading some of the reports around the world about the leak at Dubai Aquarium.

They often add the the old property crash/debt crisis/Burj Khalifa lift problem stuff, so they become very negative about Dubai. And of course it encourages the real Dubai/Arab/Muslim bashers to jump in with their comments.

Here's a classic from the Huffington Post for example:

"Coool! Dubai is the farce of modern society. They have everything.... but it's built with our oil money ..... they are NOT a modern society... they are the oppose. People still get flogged for kissing in public, jailed for infidelity, and any other horrific thing you may hav heard about; men whip women on the beach in bikinis, spit on them...and that's just the tip of the sand dune."

Anyone in Dubai recognise the place from that?

But I did enjoy a couple of the other comments:

"It was probably caused by a stray bullet from the not-so-secret Mossad hit squad.

Boy! When things go wrong..."

And:

"Dubai has a lot of problems,,,,,,,,,,,,,, i.e. bankruptcy; closure of their new tower; this.

Is it possible that they themselves staged the hit on the Palestinian murderer to take attention away from its own problems?"

Anyway, that was really an aside, I distracted myself.

What I was going to post about was that while 'Dubai' is taking all the flak there's an important part of the story that isn't included.

'Dubai' didn't make the huge acrylic window, 'Dubai' didn't design the aquarium and 'Dubai' doesn't operate it.

The difference in reporting is interesting.

Buildings collapse in other cities but the stories aren't negative about the city itself.

Toyota has major problems and the negative stories are about Toyota. Not about 'Japan'.

But with the aquarium leak, and other stories about problems in Dubai, it's 'Dubai' itself which takes the hits. In fact, the aquarium problem must surely relate to either the designer and operator, Oceanis Australia Group, or to Emaar.

The viewing panel, which leaked, was commissioned under the supervision of Oceanis Australia Group. I can't find the name of the manufacturer, although there seem to be only three companies in the world capable of producing it. It's the world's largest acrylic panel, 32.8 meters wide, 8.3 metres high, 750 mm thick and weighs 245,614 kg.

When it was commissioned it was, according to Emaar's press release:

"...at the limit of production abilities by major acrylic manufacturers..."

It isn't in one piece though. If you stand at an angle to it you can see where the panels are joined. The panels are apparently fused with acrylic-soluble cement. From what I can gather from the stories it was a joint that was the problem, although the information is vague as usual and I could well be wrong.

I assume the panels were joined in the specialist factory, in Japan or wherever, which built it. Or could it be that the panels were joined here? That might be something that could be (but won't be) clarified by Emaar's PR people.

It would be good to hear from Oceanis Australia Group and from the manufacturer of the window about what happened and why.

I wonder if the PR people from the three organisations are talking to each other and getting factual information together that would stop the speculation...



Huffington Post story is here.

Emaar's original press release is here.

Now Dubai Aquarium has a problem

Following closely on the malfunctioning lifts in Burj Khalifa creating bad international publicity for Brand Dubai we have another bad story.

The huge aquarium in Dubai Mall has sprung a leak, causing an area of about 100 shops to be cordoned off with people told to leave the area.

The Wall Street Journal heads the story "Leak at Dubai Mall Aquarium Forces Evacuation"

It notes that it's: "the latest mishap to hit one of Emaar's prestigious projects. The company was forced this month to close the viewing deck in the world's tallest building, Burj Khalifa, in the center of Dubai."

A visitor from the US is quoted as saying: "It seems that as they're building things here, they're crumbling at the same time."

And the head of Middle East research at UBS AG told the WSJ: "Emaar has always been known as a quality developer, but they've been under pressure to finish Dubai Mall and Burj Khalifa. I'm not surprised that they've had maintenance issues. They've definitely put into question their quality and are compromising their quality over volume."

The news wires have put the story out, it's starting to appear in the media all over the world and the reports use words like 'evacuation' and 'shark tank' to add to the drama.

The Chicago Tribune headlines the story "Dubai's latest blooper".

Even the usually restrained BBC runs the headline "Huge shark-filled aquarium in Dubai cracks open".

Apart from the more serious media I always like to check out what the tabloids are saying, because they have the most readers and so shape much more opinion, sadly.

Predictably, the UK tabloid The Sun screams: "Terror as mall shark tank cracks". It goes on to tell its several million readers: "Shoppers at the Dubai Mall fled in terror fearing that they about to be engulfed by 10 million gallons of water holding 33,000 sea creatures...Mall security men donned life jackets"

And inevitably, according to The Sun: ...anyone with photos of the drama were ordered by cops to delete them."

Too late, the paper has a photo of water gushing from the crack.

Naturally, most of the stories also refer back to the lift problem in Burj Khalifa and to Dubai's debt problems.

It's all doing huge damage to Dubai's reputation and it's becoming a PR man's nightmare.




The Wall Street Journal story is here.

The Chicago Tribune is here.

The BBC has the story here.

The Sun story is here.

Handled the worst way - again

The official statement:

"Due to unexpected high traffic, the observation deck experience at the Burj Khalifa, At the Top, has been temporarily closed for maintenance and upgrade".

From a visitor:

"I was walking around the observation deck when I heard this really loud noise and what looked like smoke or dust coming out from one of the elevator doors. One of the elevators had not reached all the way to the 124th floor and I saw some people climbing a ladder from the elevator up on to the observation deck."

The story goes on with visitors' reports that around sixty people were trapped on the deck for over an hour until they were taken down by service elevator, that they were scared, angry, crying, that there was a lack of information

Absolutely typical. And absolutely the wrong way to handle issues.

It's not rocket science. First, tell the people involved what's happening. Quickly. It's not hard.

'There's a mechanical problem with an elevator. There is no danger and you will shortly be taken to the ground floor by the service elevator. While we're arranging that please continue to enjoy the view.'

Then tell the media what's happened. That's not hard either.

'There was a fault with an elevator, no-one was hurt and there was never any danger. All visitors were taken to the ground floor by service elevator. The deck will remain closed for one week, affected tickets will be refunded and there is no delay in handing over the rest of the building.' Take questions and answer them honestly.

But what's the normal way to handle a problem here?

The immediate reaction is 'can we deny it outright'?

If what's happened is too public to deny outright, make an excuse that dismisses the problem as routine or so minor as to not require comment. Under no circumstances do you say what actually happened. All senior people immediately go to ground.

Pointless. Wrong. Counter-productive. You've added hugely to the problem.

Because people who were affected reveal what really happened.

Senior people remain in hiding. The 'ignore it and it'll go away' strategy. But the damage is done and they're adding to it by their actions.

I've ranted about it many times in the past. It's not the problem that's the problem, the way you handle it is the problem. And here we have yet another repeat of the absolute worst way to handle a problem.

It's yet another blow for Brand Dubai too, because it's making news around the world. Bad news.

I've seen it in US, Australian, British, New Zealand, Indian papers already this morning.

The Huffington Post story, for example, includes:

Electrical problems are at least partly to blame for the closure of the Burj Khalifa's viewing platform – the only part of the half-mile high tower open yet. But a lack of information from the spire's owner left it unclear whether the rest of the largely empty building – including dozens of elevators meant to whisk visitors to the tower's more than 160 floors – was affected by the shutdown.

The indefinite closure, which began Sunday, comes as Dubai struggles to revive its international image as a cutting-edge Arab metropolis amid nagging questions about its financial health.

In a brief statement responding to questions, building owner Emaar Properties blamed the closure on "unexpected high traffic," but then suggested that electrical problems were also at fault.

Despite repeated requests, a spokeswoman for Emaar was unable to provide further details or rule out the possibility of foul play. Greg Sang, Emaar's director of projects and the man charged with coordinating the tower's construction, could not be reached.

The shutdown comes at a sensitive time for Dubai. The city-state is facing a slump in tourism – which accounts for nearly a fifth of the local economy – while fending off negative publicity caused by more than $80 billion in debt it is struggling to repay.

It goes on to say:

Questions were raised about the building's readiness in the months leading up to the January opening.

The opening date had originally been expected in September, but was then pushed back until sometime before the end of 2009. The eventual opening date just after New Year's was meant to coincide with the anniversary of the Dubai ruler's ascent to power.

There were signs even that target was ambitious. The final metal and glass panels cladding the building's exterior were installed only in late September. Early visitors to the observation deck had to peer through floor-to-ceiling windows caked with dust – a sign that cleaning crews had not yet had a chance to scrub them clean.



Today's story on what really happened is here.

The Huffington Post story.

A couple of previous examples of how not to handle a problem are here and here.

Typical!

Open all of four weeks, now "due to unexpected high traffic, the observation deck at Burj Khalifa has been temporarily closed for maintenance and upgrade."

Absolutely typical.

Build something, open it to great fanfare. Almost immediately surround it with red & white cones and dig it up.

'Unexpected high traffic'? It was always going to be a major attraction, numbers are capped, volume of traffic to expect was obvious.

The real problem is in the statement though: "Technical issues with the power supply are being worked on".

Again, it's absolutely typical. Had the work been done properly in the first place there wouldn't be 'technical issues' after four weeks.

The story's in Arabian Business.

More on driving standards

"Transport Minister says the results show that while most drivers are well-informed about road safety, many are choosing to ignore the warnings."

Very true.

But in another of those 'it ain't only Dubai' moments, it's the Australian Federal Transport Minister talking about Aussie drivers.

I've long complained about the lack of lane discipline in Oz, drivers doing much the same things wrong as here in Dubai.

A single lane road widening into two or more lanes sees the majority of drivers immediately dashing to get into the wrong, overtaking, lane. Slow drivers sit in the overtaking lanes, on freeways and other roads.

Every person I've asked who took lessons and passed their driving test in Oz, without exception, has said that lane driving was not taught or even mentioned.

A couple of recent stories give an idea of how serious the problem is on our roads.

A survey has found Australian drivers are continuing to ignore warnings about road safety and engage in risky and illegal behaviour on the nation's roads.

Almost two thirds of respondents admitted to regularly using their mobiles while driving, twenty-five per cent of respondents felt it was acceptable to speed in some circumstances, sixteen per cent had fallen asleep at the wheel and four per cent believed they had driven while over the legal blood alcohol limit. Almost twenty five percent of drivers have been booked for speeding in the past two years,

I'm sure it's not just in Oz either, many countries have similarly dangerous drivers.

Not just dangerous but incompetent.

How's this for leaving an office block car park...


Photo. Sydney Morning Herald

The driver claims she 'lost control' of her car.

I would have thought that if you're driving sensibly and competently out of a car park it's very difficult to 'lose control' of the car.

We're right to complain about the poor driving standards here but we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking it doesn't happen elsewhere.

Survey report.
Woman freed from hanging car.

Still in the pre-internet age

There's a huge gulf between the claim that Dubai is an ultra-modern commercial/financial centre and the out-of-date thinking of so many of the companies operating here.

We're still in the age when to get anything sorted out people are expected to visit companies personally and wait in endless queues. In an age when e-mails aren't even read let alone replied to. In an age when material needs to be sent to companies by fax.

Companies got as far as understanding that a website was a good idea - but having set them up they simply left them. Huge numbers of them are several years out of date, making them useless.

On various forums there are regular complaints from people overseas that they get no response to e-mails to hotels, tour companies and others.

There are a couple of reports in Gulf News today that continue the story, relating to the ultra-modern tallest structure in the world, Burj Khalifa.

The first is headed "Confusion over Burj website owner persists" and talks about the people involved in registering burjkhalifa domain names.

How could it be allowed to get to this? When the name Burj Khalifa was decided on it should have immediately been protected. It's very basic stuff that the domain names such as burjkhalifa.com and .ae and .org and .info and the others should have been registered.

They weren't, so we have the free-for-all that's now going on.

The official website is all over the place too.

That Emaar site is still burjdubai.com and that's what the tower is still called on the site.


The second report is about the queues for Observation Deck tickets, in which the final para says "The announced online ticket booking on the tower's website was not yet active at the time of going to press."

I went to check it. If you browse through the Observation Deck section you'll find the valuable information: "At The Top will open in January 2010." Will open. How long ago was that put on the site?

A pop-up tells you to: "Purchase your tickets online for the date and time of your choice" but nothing happens if you click on it.

The Observation Deck was obviously planned years ago, everything's now in place, it's up and running - but no-one thought to have the website ready.

What's going on with management and IT people here?



The stories are here and here.

Dangerous road management

Over the almost four years of this blog I've often complained about poor management of our roads which adds immeasurably to the dangers and chaos.

A lot of it's simple basic stuff - bad road design, merging lanes far too short, misleading signage, that sort of thing.

There was another classic example this morning on Al Sufouh Road, the stretch between Dubai Marina and Knowledge Village.

For many months they've been digging the road up and diversions have been in place, which we've all got used to.

This morning it had all changed.



Not a word of warning, no sign saying 'Changed traffic conditions'.

Suddenly we're on a stretch of road we don't know, with no idea where the road we need is, no idea which lane we need to be in.

Inevitably there was confusion, lots of slowing down, lane changing, last-second swerving.

It's not rocket science is it, it's simple admin, a procedure.

"If we change a road layout we must alert motorists to that fact with a warning sign".

Yet they can't do it.

No power, no water, no information

It's what happens when development runs so far ahead of infrastructure.

There are too many buildings, too many people, too much traffic for the power supply, water supply, sewage treatment, roads to cope.

Sharjah has been having real problems for a long time and adding to them is the standard attitude of organisations in the area.

Be unavailable. Say nothing. Go into hiding.

It's an ongoing story, continued in today's Gulf News:

"Unable to bear the summer heat, residents in industrial areas in Sharjah who are going without electricity and water are now sleeping on pavements and terraces...'There is no water supply and we have to buy water from outside even if we have to go to the toilet'....'The kitchen sink is filled with pots and pans waiting to be cleaned, but that can only be done once we get electricity and water supply restored'...Dr Shuhaib S. Hameed, a dentist, had been caught off-guard on several occasions when the electricity supply went off abruptly while he was busy with his patients. 'Once, I was extracting a wisdom tooth and all of a sudden the electricity went off. It took a while before we got the generator up and running, but in the meanwhile it could bring harm to the patient'..."

And in reference to communication from the supplier, SEWA:

"Asked whether they have contacted the Sharjah Electricity and Water Authority (Sewa), Ali said: 'Sewa? What Sewa offices are you talking about? They hardly pick up their telephones. We are tired of calling them up.'

'Load shedding happens everywhere and in every country, but all that we want is for the Sewa to inform us on the timings when power failure is going to take place.'

Gulf News tried to get in touch with Sewa, but no one was available for to comment.

I think it's the tell-them-nothing attitude that annoys me more than anything.



The Gulf News story is here.

Customer service. An oxymoron.

There was good news the other day, that the recently announced consumer arbitration courts will be up and running by the end of the year.

The plan is that instead of having to battle with the long-winded and prohibitively expensive legal system, consumers will be able to take their complaints directly to the new arbitration courts.

It's said that the judges will be specialists in the country's consumer protection law. The law covers the supplier’s responsibility to replace damaged goods and display prices clearly, and the consumer’s right to compensation for personal or financial damage.

Hopefully it will help to lift the game of suppliers here, but I'm afraid it will only help in the specific areas of shoddy goods and price cheating. I'm doubtful that it will help in a general sense to ease the frustration so many of us have in our dealings with companies.

The constant complaints about the lack of customer service delivered by our banks is an obvious one that I'm sure isn't covered.

I'm particularly irritated with Showtime TV at the moment, and again it's not something that appears to be covered by the consumer protection laws. It's just old-fashioned customer service that's lacking, a don't-give-a-damn attitude, complete disregard for the paying customers - much like the banks.

We buy one of the packages offered by Showtime which lists the channels included in the package. On a regular basis channels disappear and others appear, totally unrelated to each other. For example a news channel might disappear and a National Geographic channel appear.

There's no warning, no announcement, no information sent to paying customers. They simply do it.

Likewise the programme schedules are all over the place. Neither the information given by Showtime to the print media nor their own online programme guide can be relied upon to actually give the correct programmes or the correct times.

The attitude is summed up by the response of their telephone help (another oxymoron) service I called a while ago - I forget now exactly what my particular complaint was at that time. Anyway, after hearing my complaint the answer wasn't what they could do to solve my problem but was: "If you're not satisfied you can always cancel your subscription".

The corporate version of 'if you don't like it here you can always leave'.

Right now I can't even get the online programme schedule on the screen, I get an error message and the whole thing freezes. I have to switch off, switch back on and I can then get into the channels - but I can't get the programme schedule.

Will I call the 'help' line? I can't be bothered. They've achieved what I assume so many companies set out to achieve, make it so difficult, so frustrating that we just go away and stop annoying them with our complaints.

Research regularly shows that there's huge disatisfaction with the level of service provided by retailers and businesses here. There's much talk about how companies understanding customer service leading to customer loyalty will thrive while those which don't will struggle.

I see no evidence that things are improving, but maybe the new courts will at least help in one small area.


The report on the new courts is here.

Great moments in design

There are a couple of classics of bad design in one small area of Dubai Marina.

How's this for probably the worst bit of road design in town?

A bridge across the marina which like all the others is a dual-carriageway. But this one cuts across another busy road.

Oops.

The answer to the stuff up was to remove a section of the bridge's central reservation, create an intersection and add a small roundabout:



Now as we know, the road rule for roundabouts is give way to traffic on your left. But with this one the traffic zooming across the bridge tends to simply keep going. Well, it looks just like all the other dual-carriageway bridges so it's understandable.

Now there are 'Stop' signs and rumble strips on every approach to the roundabout - but they're not a hundred percent successful, as you would expect.

If you drive across the bridge to JBR there's a public car park in one of the buildings.

I used it the other day, looked in vain for the stairs down to street level and asked the car park attendant where it was.

"No stairs sir"

"So how do I go down?"

He pointed to the car access ramp.

"That's the only way?"

"Yes sir"



I have three questions.

Who designed this stuff?

Who approved it for construction?

Are they still in their jobs?

Accepting responsibility

I'm quite prepared to acknowledge that more than a few things annoy me.

I post regularly about my irritation with things like bad planning, management incompetence, lack of communication, the mangling of the language, bigotry.

There's another thing which annoys the hell out of me that's just cropped up again - leaders saying they accept full responsibility for their actions.

We get it from politicians, leaders of business, of the armed services, of the police.

After their actions have caused problems in the lives of others, caused people to lose their jobs, their homes, their lives in some cases, the waste-of-space 'leader' stands up and says he accepts full responsibility for his actions.

And you know what accepting responsibility actually means to him?

Nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

He's affected in no way whatsoever.

It's the ultimate insult to our intelligence. The final middle finger gesture to the people whose lives they've damaged.

The latest to do it is the former CEO of Lehman Brothers, the bankrupt investment bank. Richard Fuld was testifying before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman.

Reading the same script which so many 'leaders' have read before he told the committee:

"I take full responsibility for the decisions that I made and for the actions that I took...this is a pain that will stay with me for the rest of my life..."

What a fatuous remark it is, stating the bleedin' obvious. He made the decisions, so how could he be anything but responsible for them?

But his pain will be eased, I'm sure, by the 'compensation' (as salary packages are called these days) he paid himself while steering the good ship Lehmen onto the rocks.

The firm, in the days before it filed for bankruptcy, sought board approval to pay three departing executives more than $20 million, according to Waxman.

"Even as Mr. Fuld was pleading ... for a federal rescue, Lehman continued to squander millions on executive compensation," Waxman said.

Some members of the committee took particular issue with Fuld for his salary and bonuses. Fuld received a $22 million bonus in March. Waxman added that Fuld "will walk away a wealthy man."

Waxman displayed a chart that detailed what he said was $480 million in compensation since 2000 and pointed out that Fuld owned a $14 million oceanfront home in Florida, an extensive art collection and another home in Sun Valley, Idaho.

"Your company is now bankrupt, the economy is in a state of crisis, yet you get to bring home $480 million," said Waxman.

Naturally, Fuld disputed the tally of his earnings.

Fuld said that Waxman's figure included stock holdings, while Waxman insisted it did not.

The reality is that he took tens, almost certainly hundreds, of millions of dollars out for himself, which he will keep.

I'm amazed he was able to keep a straight face as he 'took full responsibility.'

I would like one of the committee members to ask him:

You have told us you accept full responsibility. Please detail to this committee exactly what that means. How will accepting responsibility manifest itself?



A report on the hearing is here.