Changes to Customer Charter

[Matty D]

Following earlier consultation by BIAS I've lent Andrew Finch and the club a hand in redrafting the Customer Charter. Revisions to it need to be submitted to the Football League before the end of the month, so the club are publishing a rough draft to invite further feedback from fans.

http://www.brentfordfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/NewsDetail/0,,10421~673171,00.html

What commitments do you want to see in the Charter? For instance:

How do you think BFC should prioritise ticket sales?

What (if any) formal policy on changes of replica shirts would you like to see?

What services and facilities would you like to see the club commit to offering at Griffin Park?

In what areas should would you like to see customer service backed up by specific pledges in this document?

The club want your comments and suggestions - email: [email protected]

Note: the two versions posted on the OS are pretty much identical, except one is formatted as a series of 'pledges'. I'm not sure why they put both up, apologies if anyone's already tried ploughing through them both lol

 

[Les Beeavinu]

It being adhered to would be the biggest change I would like to see. What recourse does a dissatisfied customer (or supporter if you prefer a more quaint term) have? If there is another Southampton, then what will happen? If there is another unfounded racist allegation, what will happen?

I think the minimum promise would be a face to face telling off by Ace Face More serious incidents and this could be expanded to a quorum of the more, ahem, vocal supporters here. Further ridicule like stocks, stone throwing, floggings might also appease a disgruntled public.

Seriously though, what would our recourse be if the clubs fails to keep it's promise?

 

[Banana]

Is there anything about what the club will do if smoking happens in non-smoking areas?

 

[Les Beeavinu]

Is there anything about what the club will do if smoking happens in non-smoking areas?

A reliable source told me that all stewards are being issued with water pistols.

 

[SKA BEE]

WE WILL MAKE GRIFFIN PARK A WELCOMING PLACE FOR EVERYONE
except 1 visiting players that dive or fake injury
2 female referee assistants that cant keep up with play/see further than two feet
any others ?

 

[The Walrus]

WE WILL MAKE GRIFFIN PARK A WELCOMING PLACE FOR EVERYONE
except 1 visiting players that dive or fake injury
2 female referee assistants that cant keep up with play/see further than two feet
any others ?

paul danson
martin rowlands

 

[Matty D]

Seriously though, what would our recourse be if the clubs fails to keep it's promise?

The requirement to maintain a charter comes from the Football League. From their regulations:

17 Independent Football Commission

17.1 In meeting the Code of Best Practice implemented by The Independent Football Commission, all Clubs must publish a Customer Charter, and provide financial reporting and accountability agreed between The Football League, The Football Association and The FA Premier League, subject to any dispensations granted by the Board.

17.2 A copy of the customer charter and any amendments made thereto shall be furnished to The League by each Club and shall be made available to the public through all usual Club publications and their web site.

17.3 In order that The League may comply with its obligations to provide the Independent Football Commission with details regarding Clubs’ performance against their charters, each Club shall:

17.3.1 submit a report by 30 June annually each year to The League. The report shall detail how each of the policies outlined in the charter have been implemented and the extent to which each has been achieved; and

17.3.2 comply promptly with any request for information made by The League.


So I guess at the end of each year the club will have to defend their impementation of the charter to the League.

 

[Les Beeavinu]

So I guess at the end of each year the club will have to defend their impementation of the charter to the League.

How exactly would that benefit me as a paying customer?

 

[Banana]

The requirement to maintain a charter comes from the Football League. From their regulations:

17 Independent Football Commission

17.1 In meeting the Code of Best Practice implemented by The Independent Football Commission, all Clubs must publish a Customer Charter, and provide financial reporting and accountability agreed between The Football League, The Football Association and The FA Premier League, subject to any dispensations granted by the Board.

17.2 A copy of the customer charter and any amendments made thereto shall be furnished to The League by each Club and shall be made available to the public through all usual Club publications and their web site.

17.3 In order that The League may comply with its obligations to provide the Independent Football Commission with details regarding Clubs’ performance against their charters, each Club shall:

17.3.1 submit a report by 30 June annually each year to The League. The report shall detail how each of the policies outlined in the charter have been implemented and the extent to which each has been achieved; and

17.3.2 comply promptly with any request for information made by The League.


So I guess at the end of each year the club will have to defend their impementation of the charter to the League.

Have you read the "Your Questions Unanswered" thread. That gives you an idea.

 

[Mr Tree]

how about a FANS report as to how succesful the club have been in implementing the charter?

i can just picture JM's report now.......

 

[Edmundo]

Some (hopefully more constructive) thoughts.

(1) For the Hinckley away match last season, priority was given to ST holders who were also members of Lifeline. The prioritisation in the draft does not allow for such a scheme - though it does seem to give BU membership parity with Lifeline. It may be needed, so the charter should provide.

(2) Similarly, the thing about "Purchasers of tickets for specified previous away match(es) - (if required)" ... "purchasers"????? I think the drafting should be without any ambiguity, and this suggests to me that if, say, I get Stedders to buy my ticket for that specified previous match - then he gets a priority and I don't. I also doubt that the club intends to keep or even can keep the necessary records to do this. Pedantry aside (though it needs clearing up), prioritising holders of tickets to away games is a good idea. But also the club has often given priority to holders of tickets to previous home games - is this to be abandoned altogether?

(3) Good to see that the club intends to abide by FL rules on treating visiting fans fairly. Any chance that the charter could include a commitment to support and take up with the FL and other club, the case of Brentford fans who have been victims of other clubs being less scrupulous on this matter - Swindon Town and Sheffield Wednesday, for instance?

(4) In the "benefit schemes" (is that what BU is), reference is made to discounts on away travel. Away travel is not run by BFC, but by the BSA. BFC is not in a position to determine who the BSA gives discounts to, so should not promise them in its charter unless it has negotiated an agreement with the BSA. By the way, has the BSA stopped giving BIAS members that discount?

(5) Replica shirt - I think it should be clearer what "contractual obligations" are. When the centenary away shirt was introduced, it meant that the gold away shirt had had a lifespan of only one year - I'm pretty sure that this had not been made clear when the gold shirt was launched. The trick of making it the "third" kit is a marketing trick, not an adherence to the charter.

(6) Telephone numbers. This 0870 stuff is a load of exploitative b***ocks and the club should publish its 020 number and not rip-off its supporters. For more info, see www.saynoto0870.com

 

[Banana]

(6) Telephone numbers. This 0870 stuff is a load of exploitative b***ocks and the club should publish its 020 number and not rip-off its supporters. For more info, see www.saynoto0870.com

I thought the club had recently launched an 0845 number.......

 

[Edmundo]

0845 numbers are rip-offs too!

 

[Banana]

0845 numbers are rip-offs too!

Don't this provide local rate calls no matter where you are calling from in the country. These used to cost the company having the 0845 number money (rather than 0870 which they always have received money for). If it's not included in your telephone providers "free calls" package that's the telco ripping you off isn't it?

 

[Edmundo]

(1) 0845 numbers are not normally included in free calls packages.
(2) No such distinction between national rate and local rate with BT anymore. So it's more expensive to call Brentford from Aberdeen using the 0845 number than using the 020 number.
(3) So if I call Brentford on 020 8847 2511, it doesn't cost me a bean, whereas if I have to use an 0845 or 0870 number then I get charged.
(4) Doesn't that website explain why this is a rip off? Here's an explanation.

 

[Mr Tree]

what an interesting debate, and so wholly relevant

 

[keefor]

With regard to away tickets or cup tickets, I would like to see the club operate a scheme where we can pre-register for them before they go on sale.

Even if there is a possible replay with our new technology we should be able to pre-register before we know if a replay is required.

Once you've pre-registered you are commiting yourself for the ticket, maybe your cc can be debited on the 1st day of sale?

The benefits of this system is that fans unable to get to GP for tickets as they live too far away or cannot get time off work will not miss out as has been the case.

A couple of added bonuses would be that 1. there should be a greater period of time so pressure on staff and systems at GP are reduced; 2. The club could guage likely demand for tickets and so avoid a repeat of the Southampton fiasco (or at least reduce the chance )

 

[CJC]

A point about the ticketing arrangments. The new charter, where it talks about when demand is expected to exceed supply in regards to the category system coming in place, still lets the club off the hook if another situation occurs.

It's perfectly fair under that for what happened at Southampton to take place; in that the club expected supply to exceed demand because they made a serious error of judgement so just sold the tickets to anyone.

 

[Baz Bee]

A couple of points:

1. Where contractual arrangements mean that Replica Kits have less than a two year life this should be clearly stated at the time of purchase and the price of the kit should reflect this reduced period of validity.
2. This will upset some people: but I never understand why disabled supporters should be offered a concessionary admission price? The Act says, in general terms, that they should not be treated less favourably, it does not say they shoud be treated more favourably. They should enjoy equality with everyone else and pay the admission price for the category of supporter that they fall in to, i.e. junior, student, senior, etc. However, if they require a helper then I do think that the helper should be able to enjoy a discounted admission, especially if they are only there as a helper and not a supporter. Disability is no different with regards discrimination as race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc, etc. I am sure there would be an outcry if muslims, catholics, women, chineses, gays, etc, etc were given a discounted admission, so why should the disabled be treated differently and more favourably than other supporters?
3. I may have missed it, but I cannot see anything about regular and accurate communications to keeping supporters informed of news, announcements, etc at the club. I believe that it is important that the club has a formal commitment to keeping supporters aware of what is happening at our club in a timely manner.

Just my initial thoughs!

 

[Mr Tree]

re point 2 Baz, is it because it's generally assumed that they are unable to earn quite as well as people without disabilities?

 

[rebus]

(1) 0845 numbers are not normally included in free calls packages.
(2) No such distinction between national rate and local rate with BT anymore. So it's more expensive to call Brentford from Aberdeen using the 0845 number than using the 020 number.
(3) So if I call Brentford on 020 8847 2511, it doesn't cost me a bean, whereas if I have to use an 0845 or 0870 number then I get charged.
(4) Doesn't that website explain why this is a rip off? Here's an explanation.

I think you've got to much time on your hands atthe moment Ed!

It could be argued that the revenue gained from such schemes goes towards funding the admin staff needed to answer the phones, etc.

 

[Simon C]

[*]Where contractual arrangements mean that Replica Kits have less than a two year life this should be clearly stated at the time of purchase and the price of the kit should reflect this reduced period of validity.

Why can't the Customer Charter say that each kit will be used for two seasons and then agree contracts that always fit the promises in the Charter? 3 year contracts with kit suppliers are a con.

 

[Baz Bee]

re point 2 Baz, is it because it's generally assumed that they are unable to earn quite as well as people without disabilities?

Sorry, cannot accept that. If earning potential is to be a discriminating factor then it should be applied EQUALLY to everyone, not just assumed that because someone is disabled they automatically earn less. I know disabled people who earn considerably more than most employed people. A carte blanche assumption is just not good enough justification. Do we then start trawling through all of the various “minority” groups in order to offer parity without discrimination?

In any case, I am not aware that there is any significant statistical evidence to support such an assumption anyway?

 

[malbee62]

A point about the ticketing arrangments. The new charter, where it talks about when demand is expected to exceed supply in regards to the category system coming in place, still lets the club off the hook if another situation occurs.

It's perfectly fair under that for what happened at Southampton to take place; in that the club expected supply to exceed demand because they made a serious error of judgement so just sold the tickets to anyone.

Completely agree, John Mac thought no one would want to go to Southampton so sold the tickets his way, what happens next season if the same situation occurs, John Mac thinks, i know , that no one will want to go to that game and the same thing happens, and can now state the charter as his defence.

 

[malbee62]

Why can't the Customer Charter say that each kit will be used for two seasons and then agree contracts that always fit the promises in the Charter? 3 year contracts with kit suppliers are a con.

Exactlty if your contracted to change the kit on a two year basis, the contracts should be for four years with the manufacturer, three year contracts are not fair to supporters, we get conned every time,.

Fans run club. lets fleece the supporters even more.

 

[Matty D]

Cheers for all the feedback - in case anyone hasn't please e-mail all comments to the club as well - I'll try and pass them on anyway, but I'm not on here all the time and may miss some.

Trying to answer a few queries:

As far as the section on 'memberships' and their benefits goes, this is the format it was presented in before, but BU have now been added to the list (it didn't even exist when the charter was first produced). I take your point about the BSA running the coaches Ed, and yes, BIAS members still get a discount.

Yeah, the phone number in the draft charter is out of date. 0845 3456 442 is the 'new' one AFAIK.

Ticketing arrangements were always going to be the toughest nut to crack. The existing charter (believe it or not) already went into more specifics than the majority of clubs. Elsewhere the policy generally seems to be "ST holders get priority, and other than that the club will decide how it’s going to sell tickets on a match-by-match basis, and let you know what we decide". Now that can work fine, but all the indications are that Bees fans would like a detailed policy that deals with as many scenarios as possible, enshrined in the charter.

The key to making that approach work is (I believe) simplicity. If the club gives priority based on factors like ST holding, club membership, Lifeline membership, stubs from previous games etc. then it can of course combine these factors to produce lots of different ‘grades’ of priority (as is done at the moment to an extent). Here you meet the other trade-off though – the more complex the system is, the less practical it would be to insist that it is activated automatically for every game. If there are 5 or 6 ‘grades’, and it was felt best to remove the club’s discretion as to whether to prioritise sales or not, then 5 or 6 successive priority periods would be required every time the club sold tickets for a game. With the new ticketing system that might be more nearly achievable, but I think it would be better avoided.

The compromise currently shown is to have two effective priority categories – ST holders, and then other ‘memberships’. I also think there is clear demand for some form of ‘away loyalty’ scheme, for precisely those occasions like Hinckley, where tickets are so scarce that Bees fans who never miss an away game, anywhere, are in danger of missing out. As drafted the club is given discretion on when to use this provision, as it should be needed relatively rarely. Of course, as many will argue, where they have the power to decide, they have the chance to make a mistake. It’s a compromise. As to how it works – physical stubs have advantages – you don’t need to have bought the ticket yourself, and disadvantages – you can lose them, they need presenting in person etc. Another method would be using electronic records of previous ticket purchases, which has the advantage of working with phone and internet bookings, but the disadvantage that only the previous purchaser benefits, and that not that many fans currently buy away tickets through the club (although BFC gets a cut when they do, so its good for the club!).

No system will be perfect, and at almost every turn there is a trade-off between the degree of discretion the club is permitted and the sophistication of the resulting system. If the club is allowed no deviation from a procedure outlined in full in the charter, then the resulting system will be simple, and a bit inflexible, because it will have to be a practical way to sell tickets for the ‘every-day’ games. If the club is given the freedom to tailor its procedures to the demands of each game then the resulting system can be very simple most of the time, and complex only where required, but fans won’t have the reassurance of a policy outlined in full in advance. The best chance the club has of getting the balance right is to listen to what the fans want – so please tell them!

 

[Mr Tree]

how about a FANS report as to how succesful the club have been in implementing the charter?

i can just picture JM's report now.......

matt - is such a thing in the pipeline? just wondering

Baz Bee - i was only saying that i'd assume that's why they get the discount - i don't know if that's the way it is. i think we have bigger fish to fry tho, and don't particularly begrudge disabled concessions myself...

 

[Matty D]

matt - is such a thing in the pipeline? just wondering

A report to who, the League? At the moment the League aren't actively asking for them AFAIK, but there's nothing to stop fans and fans' groups letting the League know what's happening on the ground at their clubs.

 

[Mr Tree]

sorry Matt, i should probably explain myself better - my question is in relation to this point:

"17.3.1 submit a report by 30 June annually each year to The League. The report shall detail how each of the policies outlined in the charter have been implemented and the extent to which each has been achieved"

Now we all know the club's ideas of it's governance are, um, i don't know how to put this... different to how some fans see it So i thought it might be an idea if either the club submits it's report to BU/BIAS before it is sent, or BU/BIAS submit a report to accompany the club's version. There is some gross incompetence involved in this club, and i think the idea of these customer charters is to stamp that out, so we should make our feelings known...

 

[Matty D]

i thought it might be an idea if either the club submits it's report to BU/BIAS before it is sent, or BU/BIAS submit a report to accompany the club's version.QUOTE]

Yeah, that's sort of what I thought you meant. I could be wrong, but I can't see the club sending its regulatory correpsondence with the Football League to BIAS for them to vet. The other point - about supporters and supporters' groups being able to contact the League and relate their experiences is what I was driving at in my earlier response.

 

[Matty D]

A point about the ticketing arrangments. The new charter, where it talks about when demand is expected to exceed supply in regards to the category system coming in place

CJC - apologies, it is worth reading the second version, that's got a stronger wording to that section, i.e. "The Club will sell tickets for home fixtures in the following order of priority:" etc.

I take it you'd prefer to see that sort of wording?

 

[Mr Tree]

The other point - about supporters and supporters' groups being able to contact the League and relate their experiences is what I was driving at in my earlier response.

ok - when i get 5 minutes to myself, i might try and whack out an email - this could be a good road to go down to actually get someone there to take some RESPONSIBILITY for their actions...

then again, that's assuming the football authorities give a flying f***

 

[Les Beeavinu]

I still don't get it though. If the club doesn't comply with the published customer charter then the league get to know. What action can the league then take?

 

[Mr Tree]

dock us points

(i have no idea, probably nothing )

 

[JoeBourke]

Good to see that the club intends to abide by FL rules on treating visiting fans fairly. Any chance that the charter could include a commitment to support and take up with the FL and other club, the case of Brentford fans who have been victims of other clubs being less scrupulous on this matter - Swindon Town and Sheffield Wednesday, for instance?

Ed,

Thought you might be interested in this press release from the Football League:

10th June 2005

The Football League has introduced new rules relating to clubs
relocating grounds, ticket prices and ground sharing at its AGM in
Chester.

The rule relating to clubs moving ground has been strengthened to
include a list of criteria that the League's Board must be satisfied
with before it would grant consent.

The new rule states that the Board must be satisfied that the
granting of permission:

a) would be consistent with the objects of The League as set
out in the Memorandum of Association;

b) would be appropriate having in mind the relationship (if
any) between the locality with which by its name or otherwise the
applicant Club is traditionally associated and that in which such
Club proposes to establish its ground;

c) would not adversely affect such Club's Officials, players,
supporters, shareholders, sponsors and others having an interest in
its activities;

d) would not have an adverse effect on visiting Clubs;

e) would not adversely affect Clubs having their registered
grounds in the immediate vicinity of the proposed location; and

f) would enhance the reputation of The League and promote the
game of association football generally.

In a move aimed at ensuring visiting supporters do not pay more than
home supporters for equivalent accommodation, The League has also
strengthened its ticketing regulations.

Clubs will now have to submit a pricing plan to The League showing
ticket prices for all areas of their ground. The League will ensure
this plan does not allow the club to charge visiting supporters
higher prices for accommodation in comparable zones to the home
supporters. If visiting supporters have use of the only standing area
in the ground they should be charged 10% less than the cheapest
covered seat, but visiting supporters may be charged more if they
occupy accommodation that is of a higher standard than home
supporters, provided the added charge is no more than 10%.

The pricing plan will be circulated to all clubs in the relevant
division and no changes will be allowed to the plan unless the
consent of the visiting club is given.

Regulations relating to ground sharing agreements have also been
updated to ensure that the football club's fixtures will always take
priority over any other use associated with the other party in the
agreement.

The new rules will come into force for the 2005/06 season.

 

[PJ]

Ed,

See below re Oldham / away prices. Not sure if they may have jumped the gun though...


http://www.oldhamathletic.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/NewsDetail/0,,10337~674229,00.html

New admission prices for Rochdale Road Stand
Following a change of regulation at the Football League AGM last Friday
clubs are now able to charge visiting fans a higher admission price for
accommodation that is considered of a higher standard than that provided to
home supporters.

Therefore the club will increase the admission price to the Rochdale Road
Stand for next season and this will rise to £21 in advance of matchday or
£22 on the day for adults and £11 in advance or £12 on the day for Senior
Citizens and u/16's.

The Rochdale Road Stand is the newest stand on the ground and the only one
that is cantilever providing fans with unobstructed views. It addition to
providing fans with a better view of the game catering and toilet facilities
are excellent and the disabled facilities are the best in the stadium.

 

[The Joker]

Ed,

See below re Oldham / away prices. Not sure if they may have jumped the gun though...


http://www.oldhamathletic.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/NewsDetail/0,,10337~674229,00.html

New admission prices for Rochdale Road Stand
Following a change of regulation at the Football League AGM last Friday
clubs are now able to charge visiting fans a higher admission price for
accommodation that is considered of a higher standard than that provided to
home supporters.

Therefore the club will increase the admission price to the Rochdale Road
Stand for next season and this will rise to £21 in advance of matchday or
£22 on the day for adults and £11 in advance or £12 on the day for Senior
Citizens and u/16's.

The Rochdale Road Stand is the newest stand on the ground and the only one
that is cantilever providing fans with unobstructed views. It addition to
providing fans with a better view of the game catering and toilet facilities
are excellent and the disabled facilities are the best in the stadium.

:mad1: :mad1: :mad1:

Looks like they've been taking lessons from Swindon. If the facilities are that good stick the home fans in that end!

 

[PJ]

:mad1: :mad1: :mad1:

Looks like they've been taking lessons from Swindon. If the facilities are that good stick the home fans in that end!

That wont happen as all their bar facilities are at the other end....

re on the day prices....
adult/child at GP = £20
adult/child at Oldham = £33

 

[rebus]

:mad1: :mad1: :mad1:

Looks like they've been taking lessons from Swindon.

Don't blame them, blame the Football League.

 

[JTofBFC]

That wont happen as all their bar facilities are at the other end....

re on the day prices....
adult/child at GP = £20
adult/child at Oldham = £33

According to this:

http://www.oldhamathletic.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/NewsDetail/0,,10337~663500,00.html

Oldham will be charging U12s £3 to go in the Chaddy End but £12 for away fans of the same age. That doesn't seem to fall within the spirit or the definition of the new rules which say something about being able to charge up to 10% more for higher quality accommodation. Charging adult away fans £22 versus £20 for home fans in the other end is within the new "rules" but I can't see that charging home U12 fans £3 and away ones £12 is within the same "rules"

If they are allowed to get away with that then I suggest we immediately increase junior prices on Ealing Rd for away fans to £12 or something similar.

 

[Edmundo]

I would suggest doing that only for the visit of Oldham Athletic. Is it beyond all hope that our "supporters run football club" would make official and publicised representations to the FL and opposition clubs who abide by neither the spirit nor the letter of FL rules? Frankly, they are conning money out of away fans and should either be fined heavily, or have points docked.

 

[LostBee]

Hasn't this gone on for years though?

I remember being charged £17 by Stoke while the home fans only had to pay £12. :mad1: