Why does it take so much to get a company to act reasonably?

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

Consider these two stories:

Story 1: A couple books a block of rooms at a hotel for wedding guests. When they arrive to check in, they are told the hotel is overbooked and given rooms at a different hotel considerably father away from the ceremony location than the first one was. The bride, rather upset at this, contacts the Hotel company to complain. Initially through a number of interactions she gets no help and a half hearted apology.

She starts submitting her story to all kinds of media outlets and websites. One of them picks it up and posts it. After this, the hotel finally decides to speak with her about the matter and refund her 50% of the room cost. The bride instead demanded a full refund which she ended up getting.

Story 2: Woman buys a sealed Ipad for her daughter at Wal-Mart. When daughter opens the box, there's nothing but paper notebooks inside. Woman takes the "Ipad" back to Wal-Mart where she pretty much gets labeled as a thief/scam artist and told there's nothing that can be done for her. She's now out several hundred dollars with practically nothing to show for it.

She takes her story to the local TV station, who promptly report on it.

Amazingly, after the report comes out, Wal-Mart suddenly changes its mind, apologizes to the woman and arranges for her to get an actual Ipad.

These are real stories (links here and here) that appeared on a consumer blog I like to visit, both on the very SAME day.

Of course what do you notice about both of them? The companies didn't even act reasonably until media got involved on behalf of the customers.

There are hundreds more stories out there, each with the same twist: As soon as the media comes calling, the company changes its tune.

I do get it but I don't get it. I understand that most people won't complain to media and so companies can get away with screwing them without harming any corporate reputations.

I also get that when media gets involved, the profile goes way up and since want to get good PR, it makes sense to treat the customer with respect and do what must be done to rectify the situation.

But what I don't get is why companies seem more than content to let things go on like this.

I don't know about you, but my opinion of both these companies dropped severely upon reading these stories (not that I had a high opinion of Wal-Mart in the first place). Regardless of the fact the companies made things right, they still showed how douchey they are by letting it get that far in the first place.

I can't see how that could win them any customers.

Why not do the sensible thing and get things right before they even get into the media? Why must reasonable customer service be the exception rather than the rule?

I really think it's possible to run a successful, profitable company without treating your customers like dirt.

[siead_lietrathua]

the first one i can see as a bit unreasonable, except for the demand of a 100% refund. that throws it into bitchy for me.
but the second? my company would refuse that return as well. the woman has no proof beyond her word that the i-pad box was stuffed with paper instead of the product. especially since those items tend to be kept in locked display cases. i don't think walmart acted unreasonably at all, and only caved to shut her up, basically. but i bet they all still believe she scammed them.
this is why, when buying high ticket electronics, insist on the clerk opening it to show you the parts.

[protege]

But what I don't get is why companies seem more than content to let things go on like this.

They do it because they can get away with it. To them, it's just a drop in the bucket. A few hundred dollars on a sale isn't going to hurt them very much. That is, until the victim decides to go to the media and the shit hits the fan. Then they're only too happy to take care of things.

I'm sure some of you remember how I dealt with a certain "garage" across town. For those who don't, those fuckers ripped me off. They were supposed to have made my MG roadworthy. The car ran, but wasn't exactly "street legal." That is, the horns didn't work, along with the windshield wiper jets, turn signals/hazards...and there were no seat belts. Plus, those bastards left a nice big *dent* in the middle of the hood! I don't know about you, but such a thing should *not* be present on a car that's been freshly painted! When I got home and noticed the damage, I was pissed. I knew what a new hood would cost, as well as the price tag for the car's paint job.

I tried contacting the garage, and even went over there a few times. Whenever I showed up, the owner was always "not in" (yet his Mercedes was parked outside), or he'd refuse to answer the phone or call me. That went on a few weeks, until I'd had enough. By this time, I was pissed, and I wanted someone's throat.

Rather than go over there with a bat, I chose a more subtle approach. That is, I carefully went through my paperwork (including the stuff I'd been billed for twice), checked the state inspection requirements, and had a lawyer (one of my dad's friends, actually) draft a strongly-worded letter.

Basically, I could prove that they'd fucked up. Not only did I have the photos of the hood damage...but I could prove that they'd simply slapped a state inspection sticker on the car. All of the things I listed earlier (horns, turn signals, etc.) would have been enough for an instant failure. Yet, it passed? Big no-no here, since if the state finds out, you're in serious shit. They don't take such things lightly...and they have been known to yank state inspection licenses of garages who do things like that.

Anyway, after the letter was signed, I had my dad deliver it. As the shop owner was reading it, the color apparently ran out of his face. He knew he was in deep shit, and I could prove it. I basically had him by the balls, and he had to play by my rules. If he didn't, I'd turn his ass in and he could possibly lose his garage.

In the end, they had to repair the car for free...plus some of the nastier jobs that I really didn't feel like doing. Cut my losses on the double-billing, and haven't been back.

What I'm trying to say is, that some companies seem to think that they're the only source of products/services on the planet...and that they can get away with treating customers poorly. These firms survive either because the lost customer is easily replaced, or because nobody will challenge them when they fuck up.

[Andara Bledin]

but the second? my company would refuse that return as well. the woman has no proof beyond her word that the i-pad box was stuffed with paper instead of the product. especially since those items tend to be kept in locked display cases. i don't think walmart acted unreasonably at all, and only caved to shut her up, basically. but i bet they all still believe she scammed them.
this is why, when buying high ticket electronics, insist on the clerk opening it to show you the parts.

This.

You should never leave a store without examining your product.

While I don't doubt that it is entirely possible that the woman got a box of paper as opposed to an iPad, I do find it incredibly likely she got an iPad and made a stink to get a second one for free.

^-.-^

[the_std]

My store gets around the iPad fraud issue by mandating that we must open the product in front of the customer and mark "contents verified" on the receipt as part of the selling process.

The hotel thing, though, I probably would have reacted in much the same way. I understand overselling policies, and I think they're necessary, but it's really the indifferent reaction of the hotel chain that made that particular scenario an ISSUE instead of just an issue.

[Aethian]

One time when Mom used to work at one store she went through and helped a gentleman pick out a very expensive item. Because of sticker placeage they couldn't verify the color of the item without opening the package. So she took it to the service desk for him and they opened it to find a very used, very disgusting product in the package. Someone had bought the item, very carefully opened it, switched items, and then returned it. So I can see the iPad switch happening but I do believe it could have been either way.

[mikoyan29]

Part of the problem is that there are enough shysters out there that when a legitimate claim does come through they treat them like a shyster. That is why I think it took considerable prodding to get Wal-Mart to act.

In the case of the hotel, the shyster was the business.

I remember reading a story somewhere that if companies were a little more cooperative in the early stages of about to be sued, they wouldn't get sued. Sometimes people think a million dollar lawsuit or whatever will get the company's attention....especially if they have merit.

[Racket_Man]

but there are LOTS of companies out there that fold like a house of cards in a breeze at the first sign of "trouble". For example my pizza company. we give away so much free stuff for the dumbest stupidist moronic reasons it is not even funny anymore.

Just look at 25% of the threads over at CS. customer demands free stuff, customers return nasty stuff, customers BS their way into a FREE HDTV, customers that want to bargin and want discounts,etc. and manager with no spine blatantly break established corp policy.

and companies like Kohl's have a no questions asked no matter what condition no hassle return ploicy. YEP the ol "let's return some snow tires to Kohl's and gets money" sceme

[Peppergirl]

Oh please. Hotels overbook all the time. It's called 'walking' the guest. Doesn't make it right, but if everyone who this happened to threw a hissy fit and demanded a full refund, they'd be bankrupt.

I think she was entitled to something, but a full refund? No. - she was an entitlement whore.

Sorry - I know that wasn't the point of the post, but it just pisses me off. Probably because I'm in the business (emergency travel call center) of listening to people bitch who this happens to.

[Andara Bledin]

It was her fucking wedding.

You don't overbook and walk a wedding party. That has got to be the stupidest idea in the history of stupid ideas.

If I arrived for my wedding and found out that the hotel that I booked with decided that my special day wasn't even remotely special to them, I'd be pissed to high heaven, too.

I've been walked. I was walked from the hotel hosting a convention (who overbooked three separate events for the same weekend and were remodeling 3 floors - assholes; they knew our event would take more rooms than were booked to begin with, having hosted us for 3 years), and I didn't throw a wobbly. Even though the promised shuttle didn't exits (fucking liars). Even though the other hotel was nearly a mile away and didn't have parking available. Even though we were treated like lepers by these fuckers. Not even though our rooms were guaranteed as part of a contract.

But if I had been part of the wedding party that had booked that weekend and been bumped to some hotel after booking my event, I'd have been livid. And "a half-hearted apology" is not going to cut it.

^-.-^

[Rageaholic]

Overbooking is just a sucky practice period, especially with airports. If there's no vacancy, they should let the customers know so they can make other plans. I know a lot of businesses do it, but that doesn't make it any less sucky.

[HYHYBT]

This.

You should never leave a store without examining your product.

While I don't doubt that it is entirely possible that the woman got a box of paper as opposed to an iPad, I do find it incredibly likely she got an iPad and made a stink to get a second one for free.

^-.-^

How many people really open everything they buy right there in the store to make sure it is what it says it is? How many stories about holding up the line would there be on CS if this became common? People get ticked enough to go post about it online for having to wait for somebody to *write a check,* much less do a thorough inspection of their purchases. I can understand saying you ought to do it for big-ticket items, but "never leave a store without examining your product" is pretty broad. Especially since the correct way to fix the problem is for the store to inspect returns.

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

A couple of things:

1. When the media got involved on the Wal-Mart story, Wal-mart investigated and determined the "Ipad" had been returned to the store by a previous purchaser after being carefully shrink wrapped all over again. So the woman in question was NOT the scammer unless she happened to be working in tandem with the first purchaser, which seems unlikely.

2. On the hotel story, the hotel told the wedding party it had a bunch of rooms booked for some business convention/conference that was in town and that's why it couldn't accommodate all the wedding guests.

I am not 100% sure but it's possible the business bookings were done under a contract which stipulated the hotel HAD to hold those rooms no matter what.

Although I agree the customer pushing for a full refund after being offered 50% was a bit SCish, that still doesn't excuse the earlier behavior of the hotel who pretty much did everything they could to avoid dealing with her.

[Andara Bledin]

How many people really open everything they buy right there in the store to make sure it is what it says it is?

If I'm paying $500 for a fancy tech toy, you bet your ass that I'm going to be making sure that it's intact before I leave the store. Plus, when you consider that these things aren't kept out where you can just grab one and have to be gotten from lock-up, you're already holding up the line, so having the box opened so you can check that the contents are what the outside says they are is a trivial additional delay.

^-.-^

[siead_lietrathua]

^this. we're talking one expensive item. not opening every item you buy. but once you pass the 300$ mark, it's worth the extra time to ensure you're getting what you think you are.