Due to high call volumes this helpline is closed

[Rufus Stone]

Leicester City Council

Lines are open to pay them money though.

[Biggy Stardust]

One expects no better from a council.

[hidetheelephants]

Call them on the pay-in line; you probably won't get anywhere but if you moan enough you might get to a supervisor.

[CraigyMc]

Rufus Stone said:

Leicester City Council

Lines are open to pay them money though.

The majority of their services can be dealt with by email per https://www.leicester.gov.uk/contact-us/phone-and-... unless this is a hill you're determined to die on for the sake of it.

[Rufus Stone]

CraigyMc said:

The majority of their services can be dealt with by email per https://www.leicester.gov.uk/contact-us/phone-and-... unless this is a hill you're determined to die on for the sake of it.

What is this obsession with hills?

I suspect you are missing the point. Where is the logic going from helping as many as they can to helping nobody because they have too many calls?

[Drumroll]

CraigyMc said:

The majority of their services can be dealt with by email per https://www.leicester.gov.uk/contact-us/phone-and-... unless this is a hill you're determined to die on for the sake of it.

Not everybody has access to emails, especially the elderly and more vulnerable.

[CraigyMc]

Drumroll said:

CraigyMc said:

The majority of their services can be dealt with by email per https://www.leicester.gov.uk/contact-us/phone-and-... unless this is a hill you're determined to die on for the sake of it.

Not everybody has access to emails, especially the elderly and more vulnerable.

Op clearly does.

[Electro1980]

Lower service levels is an inevitable consequence of funding cuts. This is what “efficiency” looks like. Very much a case of voting for the Leopards Eating Peoples Faces party.

[119]

Thrilling.

[CraigyMc]

Rufus Stone said:

CraigyMc said:

The majority of their services can be dealt with by email per https://www.leicester.gov.uk/contact-us/phone-and-... unless this is a hill you're determined to die on for the sake of it.

What is this obsession with hills?

I suspect you are missing the point. Where is the logic going from helping as many as they can to helping nobody because they have too many calls?

Ah, the hills. Run to them. Cracking song.

I'm comfortable with how much of the point you're expressing, thanks very much. Your intellect is small. Okay, now that we've both insulted each other, the logic is that the council tax rises are limited in law, so the council cannot raise more funds that way, to cover the increased costs of running it (inflation is a bh).

That covers it.

Happy to help (via email of course)

[Dogwatch]

Electro1980 said:

Lower service levels is an inevitable consequence of funding cuts. This is what “efficiency” looks like. Very much a case of voting for the Leopards Eating Peoples Faces party.

And a ransomware attack: https://www.theregister.com/2024/04/04/ransomware_...

[hidetheelephants]

Council tax rises aren't limited, although if they want more than 5% it needs a plebiscite.

[Yertis]

Electro1980 said:

Lower service levels is an inevitable consequence of funding cuts. This is what “efficiency” looks like. Very much a case of voting for the Leopards Eating Peoples Faces party.

Surely it's more efficient to have people answering queries by phone, in which a rapid exchange of information takes place, including questions etc rather than have them read, then type out a response by email.

Unless they have the same policy as Bristol City Council who simply ignore my emails.

[Biggy Stardust]

CraigyMc said:

The majority of their services can be dealt with by email per https://www.leicester.gov.uk/contact-us/phone-and-... unless this is a hill you're determined to die on for the sake of it.

Two weeks ago I had to deal with the council- their website didn't cover what I needed therefore they had to be telephoned. I suspect that I'm not an isolated example.

[Electro1980]

Yertis said:

Electro1980 said:

Lower service levels is an inevitable consequence of funding cuts. This is what “efficiency” looks like. Very much a case of voting for the Leopards Eating Peoples Faces party.

Surely it's more efficient to have people answering queries by phone, in which a rapid exchange of information takes place, including questions etc rather than have them read, then type out a response by email.

Unless they have the same policy as Bristol City Council who simply ignore my emails.

Hence the quote marks. It’s more efficient, but more expensive to have enough people to meet peak demand. Much cheaper to have a long turnaround and hope people give up, find the answers themselves or give up in frustration. But many people, including the current government, equate efficiency (or value for that matter) with cheap. We have an Aldi government and people wonder why we don’t get Waitrose services.

[Sheets Tabuer]

Look at it this way, at least you'll get a free copy of Norton Identity Advisor.

[dundarach]

Biggy Stardust said:

One expects no better from a council.

You should expect better.

And if you're not getting it, you should stand for local government, rather than moaning about it.

They're there to represent you and if they're doing a terrible job, go out and fight them in public, or at least write to them and complain.

Pointless ranting on here!

[Super Sonic]

CraigyMc said:

Ah, the hills. Run to them. Cracking song.

Also 'Hollow Hills', 'Running Up That Hill'

[Biggy Stardust]

dundarach said:

You should expect better.

True, but I shouldn't anticipate it.

dundarach said:

And if you're not getting it, you should stand for local government, rather than moaning about it.

I couldn't immerse myself in the cesspit which is local politics.

dundarach said:

They're there to represent you and if they're doing a terrible job, go out and fight them in public, or at least write to them and complain.

I have a nice collection of apologies from occasions when they've been incompetent- I presume that apologies are cheaper than effective work practices.

Edited by Biggy Stardust on Tuesday 14th May 23:24