Brilliant! I was beginning to worry BT might just turn around and provide a quite different policy to the one outlined on the phone.
(Perish the thought! But some organisations have done exactly that to me).
But no, after a week or so of chasing around internally, they have sent me their guidance on name change and it is adequate. I wrote back and suggested maybe it only gets a 4 out of 5, since the document listing IS capable of creating confusion, particularly if their fundamental position is: satisfy security requirements, and all will be well.
So I’ve volunteered to give them a hand in writing some slightly tighter guidelines, and will see if anything drops out of that.
Bottom line, though, is their position is much as the majority of organisations ought to be taking (nPower – are you listening?): so long as an individual can satisfy security to prove they are who they say they are – then they can amend their name on their account.
So long as a customer can answer our security questions, a new account does not have to be created and advisors are able to change the name on that account. This is when the account holder is the same person but the name needs to be changed under the following circumstances:
* name change due to marriage or divorce
* name change due to deed pole
* gender re-assignment
* BT error, eg, spelling mistake.
Further written documentation or evidence would not be required.
OK. No mention of “stat dec” – and i did tease them about the spelling of “pole”: perhaps this is an altogether new legal instrument, sort of allied to Morton’s Fork, and a means whereby consumers can poke companies.
Meanwhile, I hear from a (cis) woman who is going thru nightmares changing her name, and whose telecomms provider – T Mobile – is nothing like as accommodating as BT and are demanding documentation before they will amend their records. Why?