Re: Fuck that
Sometimes people want to simply know they've been dealt with properly, even if it means the other party is simply going through the motions.
I work in insurance, mostly business processes, but a few weeks ago I was front line claim handling as a result of all the storm claims we were getting. You really don't want to waste time with non-claims when you know there are dozens of other people in the queue.
One perennial issue we get with storms is blown out fencing. For the team I was on it's simple: none of the policies cover fencing for storm damage, it is a specific exclusion on every policy. The calls can be broken up in three ways:
The first is a simple "Am I covered?" query. Simple, check what policy they have to ensure they're with the right team and advise not. Matter closed in two minutes.
You break up the the remainder by judging the reaction to your "Oh, we need to see if you're covered..." observation. If they appear more speculative than anything else you establish which policy they have, look up their individual schedule if need be, advise as in the first case. Takes perhaps five minutes.
If they're more assertive they want to make a claim then fine you create a claim and take all the details. At the end you find the schedule and then point to the specific exclusion in the policy. It takes the customer twenty minutes on the phone, ten further minutes of admin afterwards for us. Ultimately the same result for the customer but it's only actually those we get our claims handling fee for (i.e. if a claim isn't set up we get nothing for advising you're not covered).
Ultimately it works against the customer's interest: once there is a claim the underwriter is charged. Underwriters vary in their opinion as to whether a claim closed with no customer payout affects their no claims but in many cases yes it does. But if you were adamant you want to make a claim, sure, I'll open and decline it in the space of a single call.