Thrifty Scots

The Royal Bank of Scotland is one of the six miscreant banks to plead guilty to currency manipulation. Here on the ground in my first visit to Scotland, it's hard to imagine the evil that such men do (I would suppose they are mainly men.) Our visit has revealed a wonderful, warm people, who generally cannot help us enough. I do see where the moniker “thrifty Scots” comes from: every piece of information and direction we get has not only a cost attached but an opinion of whether it is exorbitant or not(“his tour is very good and not as expensive as Jim's.”) Probably because I'm an East Coast Jew, it sounds reasonable and refreshing to me.

At a woolen store today in Edinburgh I scandalized my WASPy wife Ann by buying sweaters and a blanket and asking, “What is my discount on this?” She scowled and walked away. The Japanese salesman asked his young Russian emigre manager Denis about it, and Denis apologized that he could only give me 5% off, but explained that the VAT rebate at the airport would deliver me 10% more. Denis

I asked Denis about he emigration and asked if he was Jewish, and he said no. He did have a Jewish friend back in Russia, he said, who never paid for anything, and then when he did pay one time, all his friends applauded.

“Why did you do that?” the friend asked.

They answered, “Because you never pay for anything.”

Reflecting on his story, then Denis asked me, “Are you Jewish?”

I said that I was. He said, “No offense.”

None taken. After all, we were in Scotland, and he had just given me 5% off.

But I digress. Who would have thought that the RBS was filled with crooks, because the people seem so nice? On the other hand, listen to what happened to us yesterday as we made our way by ScotRail, the national railroad of Scotland, down to Edinburgh, a pleasant trip of about four hours.

First, on the day before, I bought the tickets on line. Because it was a lengthy trip we bought first class seats. Instead of the regular fare of £83.80, first class was £131.40, about £48 more. We reserved seats, showed up on time, got on the train, and found out to our astonishment that we were seated in the regular coach, not first class. We inquired and found that others were in the same situation. ScotRail had figured on two first class cars but then decided on only one. OK, not a tragedy, but we would be due our first class fare back, of course. The conductor marked our tickets with some scribbling and told us that when we got to the station in Edinburgh we could go to the ticket counter and get our money refunded. Fair enough.

Except, not fair enough. We found the ScotRail ticket counter after a couple of tries and the curt clerk at the counter told me that since we had bought our tickets on line, we could only get a refund on line. Bizarro! How do you get a refund on line? How do you show them the tickets with the conductor's scrawl?

But, having no choice, when we got to our hotel, spirits buoyed by a terrific room upgrade, I set to work at the ScotRail website, division of customer support. I explained my problem:

Sirs:
On 21 May my wife Ann and I purchased by internet first class tickets to travel from Inverness to Edinburgh on 22 May on the 10:45 train.  Our ticket numbers are 02308 and 02309.  Our seat ticket numbers are 02310 and 02311.  When we arrived at the train they told us that a first class car had been cancelled and we needed to take ordinary seats, which we did.  They told us that the extra premium we paid for first class would be refunded at the Edinburgh station.

Unfortunately, when we sought payment at the station we were told that since we had purchased the tickets on the internet, we would have to seek restitution over the internet, hence this communication.

We would very much appreciate our first class fares being refunded.

I can be contacted by email at buddshenkin@gmail.com.  My cell phone number from the US is 510-918-0698.

Thank you very much in advance.

Budd N. Shenkin, MD

The return email said:

Case Logged Notification. Reference: SR/150522/CDQJ

Thank you for contacting ScotRail.
We aim to reply to emails within 7 days.  If however, you need a quicker reply please call us on 0344 811 0141.  Alternatively you can visit our website scotrail.co.uk for live train information, to plan a journey, buy tickets or visit our Frequently Asked Questions.
Kind regards
The ScotRail team

Seven days seemed a bit long, especially since we would be long gone by then, so I availed myself of the telephone number and explained our problem to the nice young lady – young – who took it in and said that she would have to get me in contact with Marie, who handled such issues, would I mind? No, I didn't mind, and young Marie – young – took in the situation, and explained that ScotRail did not issue actual money back, but vouchers which could then be used to purchase ScotRail tickets, or could be turned in for cash. Would I please mail in the tickets?

“Mail?” I queried. “Mail?”

“Well, I guess you could take a picture of them and email them to me.”

OK, that sounded possible. What would happen then?

“Then we will mail out your voucher to you within seven business days.”

“But we are only here in Scotland two more days, and we will be flying home from London in 10 days.” There is, of course, no place in London to cash in vouchers. And since this was a Friday and a three day weekend facing us, it would be unlikely that a railroad company would be working for some time – especially since the railroad union was threatening strike on Monday and Tuesday, for maximum disruption (wanting higher pay since they make only about 40% more than police or firefighters – shades of BART in the Bay Area! But I digress again.)

“I'll talk to my manager.”

OK, she was a sweet young thing, trying. She came back on the phone and urged me to send them to the same address where I had sent the first note and to attach a new case reference number she gave me, even though I had been assigned one

“If you can get me the tickets by 2 PM on Saturday, we can try to mail out the vouchers on Monday. Where can we send them to?”

Good question, good question. Where, indeed?

I complied nonetheless with the following note with the title of the new case reference number she gave me:

SR/150522/CDRG

Budd Shenkin

to customer.relat.

Sirs:
As I explained in a phone call and in an email, on 21 May my wife Ann and I purchased by internet first class tickets to travel from Inverness to Edinburgh on 22 May on the 10:45 train.  Our ticket numbers are 02308 and 02309.  Our seat ticket numbers are 02310 and 02311.  When we arrived at the train they told us that a first class car had been cancelled and we needed to take ordinary seats, which we did.  They told us that the extra premium we paid for first class would be refunded at the Edinburgh station.

Unfortunately, when we sought payment at the station we were told that since we had purchased the tickets on the internet, we would have to seek restitution over the internet.

We would very much appreciate our first class fares being refunded.
When I spoke to your representative, Marie, who was very nice, she explained to me that it was policy that the only refund would be by voucher, which could be redeemed at a ScotRail office.  (Why ScotRail cannot credit the sum to the same credit card to which the original fare was charged, remains a mystery.  That is certainly what other enterprises are able to do.)  She also explained that it would take some time for such a voucher to be issued.  It is unfortunate that we are at the end of our Scotland visit, and expect to leave on Monday May 25 for England.
The representative asked for copies of our tickets.  See attached.  She also asked for where the vouchers could be sent.  We are staying at the Waldorf Astoria Caledonian Hotel in Edinburgh until Monday.  If the vouchers are to arrive after that time, they should be sent to my sister's house:

Emily Simon

9 Elsworthy Road

London NW3 3DS

United Kingdom

I can be contacted by email at buddshenkin@gmail.com.  My cell phone number from the US is 510-918-0698.

Thank you very much.

I then received the following reply:

Case Logged Notification. Reference: SR/150522/CFCT

Customer Relations

to me

Thank you for contacting ScotRail.
We aim to reply to emails within 7 days.  If however, you need a quicker reply please call us on 0344 811 0141.  Alternatively you can visit our website scotrail.co.uk for live train information, to plan a journey, buy tickets or visit our Frequently Asked Questions.
Kind regards
The ScotRail team

SO, we now have at least three different case numbers and a promise for them to hurry up to issue us vouchers for which we will have scant ability to exchange for the cash they already took from us. In essence, as Ann summarizes it, they took our money in exchange for a seat they promised but could not produce, and now refuse to refund our money.

The irony is that this occurs in a country that is so punctilious about financial matters, so watchful, so financially conscious. As always, one asks, is it stupid or evil? Or as in most cases, a bit of both? For RBS, evil wins the day. For ScotRail, I figure it's both -- stupid in bureaucracy, but evil in screwing the public. 

I'm just trying to figure if my 5% discount from Denis covers my £48 loss to ScotRail.

Budd Shenkin

More Advice For Hillary

A month or two ago I posted a memo to the Hillary team to the effect that she go after issues, and fill all campaign space with them immediately. Doing so would show the results of her experience and knowledge, which would be better than just claiming those qualities. Doing so would also deflect attention from the usual person-based commentaries which generally do her no good. Also, in the event that she wins the presidency, having a record on the issues would enable her to claim a mandate for pursuing those issues.

Now I have a follow up proposal. She should base her issues on one common theme: infrastructure. She should say that it is not the government's role to achieve success directly, but it is the government's role to enable as many as possible of its citizens, and its businesses, to do so. It is government's job to get them up to the stage; performing is then their responsibility.

Infrastructure conventionally means buildings and roads, I guess, and that's a good place to start. It's traditional. Lincoln's Whig platform for election was for the government to promote the expansion of railroads. Eisenhower famously promoted the interstate highway system. Both Abe and Ike came from areas that benefitted from the programs, rural Illinois and rural Kansas. Both knew what it was like to be isolated in a backwater. Hillary can't claim their personal experience, but pressing for increasing road and bridge maintenance is something everyone knows we need. Governments can be so foolish in overseeing decline. It was so disappointing for Ann and me last year to visit Spain and ride our busses on roads of a quality simply unobtainable here at home. We just have to make sure that California's personal nemesis, Caltrans, is not allowed anywhere near any of the projects.

Infrastructure needs to expand its definition beyond roads and buildings. Band width and speed are commonly granted admission to the “infrastructure” rubric. Again, how can we be 28^th or whatever it is we are in the world in computer technology infrastructure? Scandalous.

I would also include health and education in the “infrastructure” definition. After all, aren't they human infrastructure? In both cases, direct government provision is not necessary and not desirable. Government influence and regulation are necessary; government financing is desirable; but government completion of the duty is not desirable. Both inefficient fields are undergoing reform; Hillary could simply pledge to improve Obamacare, and to expend more money and effort on the schools supporting current reforms of all sorts, including improving Obama's Community College is Free program.

OK, it's not an imaginative list of responsibilities for government, but that's OK. None of these are new areas, and none of them new for government, but that's a good thing for an election. Who needs a new program on the docket? What she needs is a declaration of what she would devote her domestic efforts toward, a set of issues that are non-controversial as governmental concerns, and a set of plans for how to get there, which can be craftily assembled.

Let the Republicans carp about the details; if they play on her turf, she will likely win. What she would hope for would be Republicans to contradict her goals on the basis that it would entail raising taxes. Indeed, some taxes might need to be raised, or maybe not. But the answer to them would be, “You're willing to let our infrastructure decay, for our capacity to grow to decay, for us to fall behind, so taxes can be low? Really?”

And then she should add that the problem with taxes is not really how high they are, especially for the wealthy, but whether or not one is getting a good deal from paying them. Is the government doing a good job with the taxes? The first requirement for doing a good job with tax money is aiming at the right goals. Are the Republicans saying that infrastructure is not the right goal? Make that case, guys! Or, if it is a worthwhile goal, how else would you achieve it, non-governmentally? Answer me that.

And she could add one thing further. She, too, is concerned about the effectiveness of government. There have been studies and studies about how to make it more effective, how to “reinvent” it, and some efforts with some limited success. Well, she could say, I do think we need constantly to work at making government more effective. So I would establish a government effectiveness commission to constantly chip away at this issue, to call for whatever civil service reforms need to be made, whatever changes in procurement, whatever changes in scale and organizational location. I would get the momentum going, and I would appoint lots of Republicans (including Tom Coburn), and lots of rather non-partisan knowledgeable people on this commission, and I promise I would listen to them. We would get government to work better. Big or small, government will always be with us. It doesn't make sense to give up on it and say it will always be so. We can learn from academics, we can learn from our own excellent officials, we can learn from the experience of other countries such as Singapore, and Scandinavia. Not everything, but something. Not complete victory, but making good progress. And I would be sure that by the end of my tenure we would be better off.

OK, maybe not visionary, maybe not inspirational, but Hillary is neither one and never will be. But it is workmanlike, doable, stable, forward-looking, progressive, inclusive, and defensible. It would be pretty hard for the Republicans to be critical, I think, hard to call it anti-business, hard to call it big-government, hard to call it soak-the-rich. Democrats would want more, and they could get more, but if she concentrated on infrastructure, she could get pretty far. She needs the image of down to earth and practical. Let the Republicans wax theoretical, let them say one after the other at a debate line up that they disagree with her priorities. What could be sweeter.

So, that's my suggestion. Let's see if the Campaign likes this one as much as they did the first one.

Budd Shenkin