The problem with the overloaded system should have been very easy to predict.  A manual system would say for arguments sake go through a thousand records a week.  Let’s say it finds 10% are suspect, it generates a hundred records to be checked.  Now I am sure they had a system to verify that the record was in fact true, and that the person had a case to answer, infringement notices would be sent out to the real offenders, lets say 50% or 50 notices. Now let’s say 10% of these ring to complain, that’s 5 phone calls.

Now when the automated system does a thousand records, it finds a hundred suspect records, it doesn’t check, there are no checks and balances, it sends out 100 infringement notices. If 10% of these ring to complain, that’s 10 phone calls.

The problem is, that what took the manual system a week to do, the automated system does in a minute. That equates to 10 calls a minute.

Now these figure are all made up, the actual figures will only make a difference to the size of the problem, not the logic on which it is based.

If you are going to speed up the analysis and retrieval system a 100 fold, you need to bolster up the complaints system at least that much initially.

The critical issue is though, that the 5% that were incorrect are not being filtered out first, so this is placing not only a burden on the system, but angst on the innocent client.  Not that there is anything you can do about it, the staff have been told not to handle enquires about the systems errors, which don’t happen anyway of course. … Yeah right!