Bond Solon Reviews

Overall I feel the course itself doesn't have much utility in our profession as customer service advisors in debt management. The majority of the time we are not able to "negotiate" payments with our customers. We may ask if they are able to Pay in full, make a payment today and then a payment plan. For a payment plan, we can advise of the interest and the process of affordability assessments to encourage the customer to agree to the shortest length of plan they can afford. After this, when it comes the affordability assessments, we can encourage higher payments but it's not a negotiation. The only time we actually negotiate is the fairly rare outcome of when the TP is offering a low amount compared to outcome of the affordability assessment. I feel this type of training essentially punishes more timid customers who may succumb to pressure easier than customers who are more comfortable with confrontation. More timid customers, may need more support than the other types of customer as would be more likely to feel pressured and overextended their affordability, putting themselves in a position of financial difficulty. The training itself touches briefly on a broad range of subjects. I feel for personal development it would be more effective for advisors to learn more about their own traits during a training sessions so they can then have a structure/framework, on how to adapt the knowledge in the sessions to their own style. The training makes us aware of the broad spectrum of personality types, without the specificity of each advisors strengths/weaknesses and how they could be adapted. I believe doing tests to understand our own personalities or traits would significantly improve the effectiveness of the course, allowing advisors to link their own case studies with techniques to improve the outcome going forward. Asking the advisors to note calls (prior to the training) that may be valuable to dissect during the training would also bring an engaging, real world, practical element to the course. I thought James the trainer was great and did the best with materials available to them.

The training was very good at providing an overview of the roles of the Gatekeeper/Monitor and AO in relation to the relevant legislation RIPA/IPA I am not convinced that it delved sufficiently deeply into either role to allow a person receiving the training to now fulfil the role. More detailed/comprehensive training focusing on these roles and responsibilities would be needed to complement this input.

As making negotiations in Child maintenance, this course did not cover much of the our diverse needs and situations - such as what to when customer threats suicide, how to we manage agreement with any customer who has threatened to commit suicide in the past. Our general customer interaction is not the same as normal business one.

This was the least useful training I have had on FtP in a decade. It was introductory, which is fine, but these were the issues: Presenter just presented verbally in a quite boring tone, with almost no slides and when they eventually appeared late in Day 1 they were run over too quickly . He often ignored questions and the chat function- which is often a challenge with so many people but it was not as inclusive as it could have been.Information content was often very general and strayed into examples from other jurisdictions-or his own opinion-(example saying hearsay is not allowed yes it us, and serious sexual cases requires go straight to straight to removal- incorrect is SCW said work through each scanction in turn). Several times SCW had to intervene and correct factual inaccuracies about process-this suggests the presenter has not bothered to look at SCW procedures. There were no Case studies. He could have shown us relevant determinations and asked us to critique them.There were no break out sessions so we didn't get talk to each other and share our experiences and expectations. That said ,the course covered the basics OK.

Please can you make an editable version of the Model reports available (in my case the Criminal version) Please can I have links to the documents that Geraint talked us through? (Judiciary UK and Justice UK). I was sent the course material the day before which I read through. Geraint then proceeded to read it to us. There was much mention of courtroom procedures rather than report writing. The introductions were long and tedious as was spending time asking what questions we would like answered by the end of the day, it would be better to mop these up at the end of the day by asking what hadn't been covered.

Eye opening, intersting

I have covered a lot of this content in other courses. It felt tedious to have two days given this level of knowledge. It was a requirement of the certificate so I perservered but I don't feel I learnt anything that I did not already know.

Not Neuro diverse friendly. Very Knowlegdable presenter, however difficult to relate to challenges at a strategic position. Less time on law and policy and more application to secenarios would have been helpful. I didnt get what I needed from this course unfortualtely, and as an educator I would review the mechaism of delivery to make it more engageing and collabourative

A very good refresher for experienced officers and pitched at right level for new officers and those not familiar.

Unfortunately whilst having high expectations I felt that the course did not give sufficient examples of best practice.