Ambiguous words and Phrases

[Peter Neilson]

You have to look beyond the words to the purpose. The bank likely 
intends to switch the customer to a different product. The next step of 
the communications might be an appointment at which the loan officer 
will probe the customer's situation in greater depth, to discover what 
the bank *can* do, because they cannot approve the original loan request.

In selling financial services, it is often important to control the 
communications so that the result is a face-to-face interview. Try 
buying life insurance over the phone. You won't be approved or denied, 
but will be led into agreeing on an appointment to discuss your needs in 
greater detail.

The concern in writing marketing materials or sales scripts is not that 
information be conveyed accurately or completely, but that an emotional 
environment conducive to a sale be created.

Andrew Warren wrote:
> V Suresh wrote:
> ...
>> It actually leaves a customer helpless if they ever get into
>> a hassle with the bank.
>>
>> If you ask me, the Banks by using such ambiguous words can
>> easily get away from any tight corners.
> 
>     I don't see that.  The loan isn't approved until the bank
>     says it is; "approved in principle" is no more harmful to
>     the applicant than "nearing approval", "not yet approved",
>     or "awaiting approval".
> 
>> Isn’t there a need to give more clarity to a customer than
>> that?
> 
>     The sentence only lacks clarity if the reader is unfamiliar
>     with the phrase "in principle".  If the reader knows the
>     phrase, it actually ADDS clarity.
> 
>     I guess the bank could simplify the language in the loan-
>     approval letter, but the customer's eventually going to
>     have to read the loan docs, and the language is MUCH more
>     complicated there.  Simplifying the letter isn't going to
>     do much to improve a customer's overall comprehension of
>     the system.