When I saw the thread titled Dodgy Traders my heart came up in my mouth. I thought I was about to read a list of businesses and accusations against them. Thank goodness that wasn't the case. The place to warn one another about dodgy traders is through the newsgroups. The Back Room is too public a forum and may attract legal action which we cannot afford to defend. You can recount an experience which you can substantiate, and others would be wise to bear that experience in mind. But you should not use The Back Room to make statements about a business (or an individual) which might be found to be defamatory, even if in your opinion they're true.
This leads me to make the following statement.
The policy of the owners of this forum is to allow visitors to post messages without prior vetting. Each message is read by the owners or their agents, but not before the message is displayed on the forum and made available over the internet. That being the case neither the owners nor their agents can take any responsibility for the content of the messages posted to the forum. Responsibility for the content of an individual message rests with the originator of that message, and if part or all of that message is quoted in a subsequent message, then the responsibility for the whole of the subsequent message including the quoted material rests with the originator of the subsequent message.
So there you have it.
Martyn
|
I thought things were getting a little out of hand.
I hope this makes people think before posting any names. I seem to recall that information posted electronically now has the same 'legal' value as that posted on paper.
David
|
|
|
|
In this day-and-age of free speech, I think it's admirable that people who feel they have received bad service can tell others. I just hope they tell the company/people concerned, first. As long as the complaint is well founded, and the author is prepared to stand by his comments, let him speak. Then, if any company/person feels so inclined, they can sue, and we can all await the outcome. Bottom line is, I doubt any company will sue, as when the full facts of the case come out in court, they will probably have more egg on their face than if they'd done nothing. The example letter from Just Tyres on a thread last week goes some way to justify this statement. Unapologetic and uncaring, just as the author had stated earlier on.
|
You very often don't get the whole picture though with complaints. All those with customer facing experience will know that no matter how hard you try, with a few, you cannot win. All too often there is nothing to complain about. I abhor those who give bad service, and the guilty should be shamed, but be cautious in case the innocent sometimes get hanged.
Mike
Mike
|
|
|
Like Mike and David I'm a little uneasy about this. I understand that Vin was annoyed but I'm sure an in-house resolution would have been possible, if less satisfying.
Two examples....
We've just been through nearly a year of agony with one of the Building Societies.........selling us one product but actually setting up another, lying about the facts then promising to resolve it within 4 weeks and actually taking 6 months. Along the way every serious customer service mistake possible was made. In the end we had all the mistakes corrected and were paid £700 compensation, I think that confirms how badly they got it wrong. For all that I'm not sure splashing their name over Internet sites would have helped our case. Businesslike persistance and comtemperaneous notes (them again!) were the answer.
In my own business I've only ever had one complaint and lost one customer (same person). This was where someone had been using a small fast fit outfit for servicing as well as tyres etc, then they decided to try me for cost saving on a larger job. This I carried out correctly but in doing so I happened to comment tyres were needed. They took the car back to the fast fit place who were obviously miffed when they saw all the work I'd carried out with my sticker under the bonnet. So they advised the customer my work had caused some damage and the customer came back for me to inspect/resolve this. This was damage unrelated to safety or running and I had noticed it when I did the job, I showed them rust on the damage that proved it was a great deal older than the few days since I'd had the car and sent them away politely.
Later on I heard that they trusted the fast fit man and not me and I never saw them again. Now suppose they had access to a forum like this and had posted "their" side of the story in a forceful manner. How could I respond and remain respectful of them as customers? I would have to give all the details of the work I carried out for them and their attitude/statements to provide "my" side of the story. I just couldn't be that disrespectful and it would get very messy.
No I'm sorry the business has one hand tied behind their back in this circumstance and will find it hard to defend even a justified complaint.
Last point I promise! There is another serious thing about the Internet. Absolutely nothing to stop Kwite Fast employees over the country posting made up accounts of bad service from Just Valves for the crack. How is the reader to know the genuine from the spoof? Best answer is not to name names at all unless in broad, good natured, terms.
David
|
|
|
|
|
The worst case his Lordship has come across was a "letter to the MD" which claimed compensation for time wasted - the shopper had failed to find a suitable gift in the store!
|
|
|
David,
Yes, I could have managed an in-house solution, but:
1. I had already offered that to the company concerned by writing to them (politely and factually, as you can see from the letter that started the thread and that was sent to them *six weeks ago*) and asking for redress. They chose not to speak to me about it. Are you implying it is my responsibility to keep chasing it until they deign to respond?
2. In light of point 1, why shouldn't I put the facts in front of other potential customers? As sure as eggs are eggs, if they had received a complimentary letter they would have been considering it for promotional purposes. Why shouldn't they get the same treatment if their service is poor?
I bow to no-one in my admiration for your customer service - if you were local, you'd be doing my servicing - but if you didn't even bother to respond when I politely asked you to resolve an issue, I'd do the same again.
And finally, I've started getting my servicing garage to do my tyres as well because they deserve the business.
Vin
|
Vin,
I know from your posts you're a reasonable guy. We'll just have to accept that you would do this again and I still have reservations.
The example I gave of my customer was not meant to be trumpet blowing, just demonstrate the dificulty I might have had in reversed the situation.
On tyre supply...All my tyres are sourced through the local town garage, he can supply me (or a retail customer) at better prices than all the independents.
And at least when he says "your shocks need changing on this mate" he's laughing like a drain!
David
|
|
|
|
