Customer associate odiel r. astibe and customer associate id no. 17090030
1. Get the remittance as a tracking number was provided.
2. On the business side, transmit two CDs in it's original packing hailing all the way from the UK to Gerona, Tarlac and get the matter over with.
Two things happened during this time:
1. Customer Associate ID No. 17090030 (REFUSING TO GIVE HIS NAME DURING THAT INSTANT) totally declined to accept and send my CDs even if it is in it's original content to the place stated above and just demurred with a sneer for reasons only known to himself while he sat smugly like a mafia boss with his arms folded at the other side of the table. Sending those CDs is NOT EVEN INCLUDED in their prohibited list as stated on their website; and,
2. As far as the remittance went, he passed the job to Customer Associate Astibe. I gave my tracking number however I totally forgot my ID so I had to quickly go home and get it. Upon my return, he could not release the condolence money EVEN IF HE KNEW IT WAS UNDER MY NAME INCLUSIVE OF MY PICTURE STILL POSSESSING THE SAME FEATURES on the premise that my baranggay ID had expired for two months blaming me for not renewing it He even advised that I should renew my baranggay ID so that I could claim the said renumeration. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS WAS ONLY ON THE FIRST WEEK OF JANUARY 2012 and it has only been barely two months plus the fact that never did I anticipate that a loved one would die barely within the first week of the New Year. Furthermore, in a biggety manner, he informed me that all IDs are inspected by them run by them quoting the Central Bank and that particular branch and it's personnel were given the authority by the Central Bank to do so as well as do background checks while the customer waits even if the remittance was just a lilliputian amount.
Customer representatives by phone and email
1. A supervisor by the name of "Cyril" (Lady) refused to take down my complaint and even threatened me that the call was being recorded which can be used against me WHICH IS ABSOLUTE BOLLOCKS! For anyone that calls the establishment for any inquiry or complaint, they just quickly the customary greeting of "Hello, Company Name and Name of the Agent. Failure to inform the calling party either through an automated service or at the onset of the call that said action is and will be recorded is tantamount to a violation against two edicts, The Right to Privacy under the Philippine Constitutional Law Section 3, and the Anti-Wire Tapping Act to which has not been amended to date just to suit another party's need;
2. Two ladies helped me: Princess Lopez and Jehan Raymundo, her supervisor and advised me to write down and email my complaint to email@example.com. Ms. Princess Lopez further elucidated that the background check that Mr. Astibe was talking about only bordered upon asking me whether or not I still worked for the company and as further illuminated by their email customer associate by the name of Mary Joyce Alcantara, "Please be informed that we validate company ID through checking the validity of the card." (referring to the ID.) "Please be informed that we are under the rules of BSP when claiming a remittance, the reason why an associate is looking for a valid Identification card. Under the rules of BSP valid up to date ID." (Again not stated in their website).
pertinent to the said bangko sentral ng pilipinas circular on what valid id's to present.......
However, upon a closer perusal of such allegation, The BSP (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas) states the following:
"The recently promulgated Monetary Board Resolution (MBR) #553 via BSP Circular # 608 series of 2008 requires depositors to present only one (1) valid identification issued by an “official authority” (click here to view copy of said Circular) from the previous three (3) IDs as required by most financial institutions. Quoting further, "The resolution does not only apply to account opening but also to other banking transactions such as claiming of remittance proceeds by OFW beneficiaries" which could then be inferred to include remittance proceeds period. Lastly, the BSP Circular also states that, "It is hoped that this new resolution would make banking more accessible to a broader segment of the population who were previously unable to avail of bank services due to inadequate means of identification."
NOTHING THERE IS STATED THAT THE ID SHOULD BE UP TO DATE. In finality, quoting the circular itself, "For purposes of this Circular, financial transactions may include remittances, among others, as falling under the definition of transaction."; and,
3. When I called back, and as narrated and checked by the two representatives that I spoke to earlier on the phone plus another by the name of CIELO CELO, they have no employee nor supervisor recorded by the name of "Cyril", contractual, regular, man or woman to speak of.
The second coming (customer associate id no. 17090030)
THIS IS PLAIN MOCKERY AND BLATANT DEFALCATION!
WHAT WAS MORE OFFENSIVE IS THAT I CAUGHT HIM TRYING TO POCKET MY OFFICE ID AND SIMULTANEOUSLY ACCOSTED HIM FOR DOING SUCH IN WHICH HE COULD NOT GIVE A REPLY. TWICE I DEMANDED MY ID BACK AND ON THE THIRD TIME AFTER HURLING AN UNMENTIONABLE INVECTIVE, HE MEEKLY OBLIGED!
To top it all, I was totally irritated over the matter is that this particular error WAS NEVER INFORMED BY CUSTOMER ASSOCIATE ASTIBE WHEREIN IT COULD BE SEEN THAT I WENT THERE TWICE ON THE SAME DAY otherwise I would have kindly informed the well - meaning sender over the matter!
I really blew my top over this one and he knew very well what the money was for and stormed out of the place. Customer Associate ID NO. 17090030's reason as to why he almost tried to slip my ID in his pocket and not letting it go is beyond my comprehension. I believe that the Central Bank of the Philippines does not sanction such devious activity since this particular branch and the establishment's overall customer service department has been loosely quoting such institution as if it were it were the preamble to the Philippine Constitution.
Furiously I wrote the sender who tried to get the money back from the Alabang branch where she sent the money to but according to that branch, she cannot get her money back anymore because she would have to pay a penalty (?) for doing such. Again, there is no such thing stated in their website much less their terms and conditions of contract found at the back of the receipt which states the following:
"12. Shipper agrees that Pesopack for pick-up not claimed within 5 days from date of acceptance as shown in this contract shall be forwarded back to Manila Head Office for safe keeping. However, either shipper or consignee may claim and request the said Pesopack be forwarded back to LBC main office of the place of origin or destination."
Even the poor shipper was subjected under a behest threat by the branch where she placed the remittance to that she would be liable to pay for any penalty in order to withdraw the money back even if she has already paid corresponding service fee to transmit the money in the first place.
Pure legalized larceny and once more using the BSP to suit their needs of keeping the money in their coffers.
In an earlier conversation that I had with Ms. Lopez, this bolstered her statement that once the remittance is unclaimed then the money is theirs to keep and treasure just like any spoils of war.