Thought I'd sarae this one with you..interesting problem

I've got this horrible feeling Mary wants a list of examples...

Bloggs Kitchens of Crapshire didn't give you half your units and after complaining they changed their procedures and moved their warehouse to Goodkitchenshire. etc.

Reply to
Fitz
Loading thread data ...

The list would run into hundreds, possibly thousands of examples, Steve. Almost all examples don't need to be documented - I only do that if I anticipate a possible future need for a "legal discussion".

Fortunately those have been few and far between and the outcome has normally been settlement plus an agreement not to name and shame. In a way, that is an unsatisfactory outcome because such organisations should be named and shamed. However if I agree to something, I agree to it and that's it. Then one can hope that as you say, Bloggs Kitchens fire their warehouse manager in Crapshire and find a better one in Goodkitchenshire and other customers benefit.

Reply to
Andy Hall

Something like that. I'd like to know how my world has been improved because of Andy's intolerance of human fallibility :-)

I don't know anyone else who's perfect ...

Mary

Reply to
Mary Fisher

Well, just a couple then.

Eh?

Reply to
Mary Fisher

Oh, Owain, you'd be surprised how well one(or two) can live on a very small income!

Just make the most of every day, if you haven't a Stannah (we haven't) do your handstands on the floor. Or the stairs themselves if you like living dangerously :-)

I don't, but some think I take more risks than is appropriate for my age. Still don't like riding pillion on the scooter though :-(

For a few months after September that won't be possible, today it was arranged that Spouse will be having cancer surgery in a sensitive place :-)

Mary

Reply to
Mary Fisher

You miss the point, Mary.

I am very tolerant of human fallibility. I always allow some kind of contingency on any purchase of goods or services that I make. This means allowing a certain amount of time and possibly cost for corrections to be made.

In fact, an organisation scores a lot of points with me if it demonstrates an ability and willingness to fix a problem if it happens. The reason for that is a simple one and is that sooner or later something will go wrong with something purchased and knowing that that will be addressed and how it will be addressed is important.

None of this expects perfection.

What I won't accept is organisations ::

- who don't deliver what they said they would and don't take rapid steps to address it (going out of their way if that's what it takes);

- who don't think it matters and that I should only expect a proportion of what they said they would do, and are surprised when I remind them of what was agreed;

- who seek to change the rules after the agreeement;

- who blatantly lie about what they are doing.

This is all very different to a situation where there is a genuine mistake or people at junior level recite a mantra that their boss gives them. These are easily detected.

However, I don't think that it's acceptable to take human fallibility as an excuse not to ultimately (and that means as quickly as possible) correct a situation that's wrong. That's a cop-out and doesn't benefit anybody.

Reply to
Andy Hall

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "Mary Fisher" saying something like:

We owe the pains in the arse a great deal (at least, according to them), so we should be grateful for their unceasing efforts.

My only objection is to the know-it-all attitude some (most) of them have - they make up for that sometimes by being spectacularly wrong on occasion and provide me with moments of amusement.

Me neither.

Reply to
Grimly Curmudgeon

Could part of the difference between your two opinions be explained by the different situations you're thinking about? At a guess, Andy's talking about stuff he encounters at work - the mention of 'hundreds' of cases implies that to me.

Andy - do you have examples of where this has happened to you as a normal customer, ie a similar situation to that which Mary might face?

cheers, clive

Reply to
Clive George

I've seen that as well, and yes it is amusing. It's really a question of reasonableness and context, so there are some simple questions that one should ask oneself:

- Is what I am asking for stated in the offer or was it just my expectation and I didn't clarif it?

- Have I verified that my position is correct? e.g. did I read the instructions?

- Can I easily fix the problem myself and move on?

- Does the person I am talking to have the ability to fix the problem or do I need to talk to someone else?

- Does the outcome make a difference that justifies the effort of attempting to get it corrected?

- (Ultimately) do I have a defensible legal position should I need it?

Depending on the various answers to those questions really determines (or should) what actions to take.

Certainly it doesn't involve being a pain in the arse unless one believes that falling short on what was agreed is acceptable. If it is, then fine. However, I would argue that the supplier should have set the customer's expectation to the lower level in the first place and/or adjusted the price accordingly.

Again I come back to my main point which is that none of this is asking anybody to do one iota more than they said they would. I don't see why anyone should have a problem with the concept.

Reply to
Andy Hall

Actually a mixture of professional and private environment. Professionally, my rules to live by have always been to do what I have committed to do for a customer and usually beyond it, and to make sure that he is informed in good time if there are possible risks beyond my control so that alternatives can be found. If it involves putting in unsociable time to address an issue, that's exactly what happens.

None of this is to say that problems don't sometimes happen - of course they do. The different between not acceptable, acceptable and excellent is not that wide in terms of effort required in most cases and generally involves the 6 Ps (proper preparation prevents piss poor performance) and allowing contingency to deal with issues and making sure that expectations and risks are addressed beforehand.

As a consumer, I don't expect "excellent" as what happens but am very pleased when it does. I certainly expect "acceptable" (= doing what was agreed or fixing rapidly to an agreed timescale if not).

I'll give you three short examples from recent days and weeks which describe "not acceptable", acceptable and excellent (IMO):

1) I travel extensively and have different sizes and types of luggage for different types and lengths of trip (e.g. a Tumi wheelbag for short trips as a carry-on and a hard shelled case from another major vendor for longer trips involving checkin.) The hardshell one has lasted for several years of almost weekly trips - so I would guess 300 or so flights. It is a little scratched but has remained intact, closes and latches properly. I am sure that you will appreciate that there is a need to have luggage that can be relied upon, but nevertheless as an additional safety measure I have a stout nylon strap which goes around the whole case and serves as an idenitifier as well.

A few months ago, I needed a larger hard shell case, so bought one made by the same vendor. The design was somewhat different, but general integrity seemed OK. This proved not to be so, and on a couple of occasions it arrived on the baggage carousel with all three catches popped open and held only by the strap. Nothing had been forced and nothing was missing. I never overload luggage either by weight or volume. On examination, it was very clear to me that the two main catches were simply inadequate in design and manufacture - if the case was lugged and put onto a carousel, one catch would pop open (to be exact a projecting plastic tab inside eroded away) and the other would immediately follow. The supplier's initial comment was that the case should be locked - that's no longer possible at many airports and not at all in the U.S. unless you have a special type of lock that the TSA can open. Thank Osama for that.

I spoke to both the supplier and the manufacturer and said that in my view the quality, or more to the point the design was not fit for purpose and that I would like a different product. At this point, the product was 6 months old. Nevertheless, both insisted that the case be repaired. I made the point that I thought that they were wasting their money on the transport and the work and that it would be far better economically for them as well as for customer satisfaction to simply replace it with something more suitable. I accepted that they could try a repair, but indicated that I had no confidence that it would work and that I was not willing to go through the exercise more than once and why. (I don't have the time and I need a proper working product; and that further, I needed it back in 7 days. That was agreed, but the case was away for two weeks (they should not have agreed to 7 days if they weren't going to do it).

After it's return, first trip and the completely predictable happens. A couple of calls both to supplier and manufacturer and no response for two weeks. Finally I wrote asking for the information on the supplier company required to initiate proceedings on the small claims track giving them 7 days for a response.

This has been the supply of the alternative product that I proposed they replace the duff designed one in the first place ( and which costs less than the original) and a refund for the difference. They told me that I can chuck the old one away.

The whole exercise has taken over six weeks of elapsed time, a lot of inconvenience and the outcome what I proposed to them in the first place.

The product line is now no longer available and to people who need reliable luggage, the world is a better place. On a number of occasions over the years I have seen people at airports in considerable distress as their underwear arrived item by item out of a failed piece of luggage. Admittedly, it's generally their own fault for overpacking or using luggage past its sell by date.

I would describe this situation as well below acceptability - timescales too long, not meeting agreed commitments and almost certainly knowing that the product was a duff design as stated by the customer in the first place. They wasted their time and mine and their money and at the end of the day wrote off the original product.

2) Less than a year ago, I bought an HP multifunctional printer/fax/scanner. A year's support and on-site warranty is included with a 7 day response. One has the option of buying a two year extension on that with same response or another with next business day response. Of course for a product costing £300, they don't send an engineer and this product developed an intermittent fault. I called the helpline and there was the expected handling by an Indian call centre and a set of three things to try. Did that. No difference. Called them back with the case number. They have arranged a replacement to be shipped and provided tracking number for shipment so that I know when it will arrive (actually it will be 5 days, not 7). When I am happy, I call them again and they will pick up the defective unit on a day to be agreed.

I would describe this situation as meeting expectations. They did what they said they would - actually slightly better. However, next time I might buy a different brand.

3) Some years ago, I bought a Miele vacuum cleaner which has performed very well indeed. Earlier this week, it developed a fault with either the powered cleaning head or perhaps the extension tube. Additionally, some of the accessories need new brushes and it was due for a service anyway. I don't have time at the moment to pull the thing apart, figure out what's wrong, order the bits and fix it.

I called Miele's helpline which I've used for whitegoods occasionally, but not for cleaners. The automated call attendant gives queue position and expected waiting time. It was under a minute. For the particular cleaner, they offer a fixed price repair package for £70 all in, which includes replacement of any defective or broken parts including accessories, a full service and cleaning, new filters and bags and transport both ways.

The logistics are that they deliver an empty carton on one day and collect it with vacuum cleaner and tools the next. Inside the box was a printed and illustrated sheet of paper with how to pack the box and a form to describe the faults (although they were already logged). So the box came yesterday and was packed. The collection was made this morning, with the driver even coming with packaging tape to seal the box. Return will be next Monday. Based on a very small number of experiences of using Miele service over 20-odd years, I am completely confident that that will happen.

I would describe this situation as exceeding expectations. The reasons are simple. They did what they said they would do. Secondly, they paid attention to detail (instructions, packaging, taping) that meant that the customer is not hassled and doesn't have to scrape around chasing them.

So far this year, Miele win my gold star, both on quality of service and on the pricing of the service offering.

It would entirely possible for any supplier to achieve this. Note that the attention to detail things that made the difference cost very little to do, but create considerable customer good will. It's highly unlikely that I would buy another brand of cleaner or white goods washing appliance.

It's a great pity that the majority fall way short and have to be pushed with considerable effort, or about meet epectations which means that I might or might not buy from them in the future.

I would be so easy to get it right. These of course are all things that are relatively minor consumer transactions. However, the principle should apply to any transaction of goods and services on any scale.

Suppliers should deliver excellent service and customers have a right to expect it. I think that the world certainly would be a much better place were that to happen.

Reply to
Andy Hall

Mary Fisher wrote: It is through these "unreasonable men" that we get progress!

Well, don't parade your ignorance QUITE so widely...

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

"Did you exchange, A Walk on part in the war, For a lead role, in a cage?"

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

You do, Drivel is a perfect tosser.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Perhaps

"We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year, running over the same old ground. What have we found? "

Reply to
Andy Hall

Ah, two grumpy old men :-) Can you still listen to that 70s stuff? I think Tom Waits has aged better.

Reply to
Stuart Noble

My wife complained again and again about the poor paint finish on our medium-priced hand-made fitted kitchen - bits kept falling off. The kitchen firm fixed odd spots from time to time, at their expense.

Eventually they realised the obvious - their painting process wasn't good enough. They sent a man round to repaint the whole kitchen with 'proper' paint. They now fit all their kitchens unpainted, and paint them, by hand, in situ. The MD admitted that they had made the change because of the complaints of my wife, and a few other like-minded customers. Score 1 for the Andys of this world.

Of course, we awkward buggers can make things worse, too. When I am leaving the country, through the port of Dover, I refuse to show my passport to UK officials, on the grounds that there is no legal requirement to do so. I suspect that if I (and others) do it enough, HMG will change the law, and there WILL be a legal requirement to show it.

rgds Alex

Reply to
atmbelg

No, in this case it was a score for Alex. Or his wife. And I suppose s/he didn't antagonise the company.

Oh come on! There's no problem showing a passport, is there?

Do you keep to the letter of the law at all times?

Hand on heart?

Or do you only get upset when others don't?

Mary

Reply to
Mary Fisher

It's not a matter of keeping to the letter of the law. There is no law that says I have to show it to leave the country. I don't even have to have it with me to leave the country (not yet, anyway!). There is no law that says that police and customs officers can't ask for it. I do have to identify myself in the port of Dover, if requested to do so by a police officer (Terrorism Act 2000), but I can use other photographic ID. It doesn't have to be my passport (and it wasn't on the ocasion earlier this year when I left my passport in Belgium!).

By the same token, the constable doesn't have to tell me who he is (why should he? there is no law that says he must).

Do I keep to the letter of the law at all times? Pretty much, as long as I know what the law is - there are, after all, some pretty obscure regulations.

Do I get upset if other people don't keep to the law? Depends on the crime.

Do I get upset when people tell me things about the law that aren't true? You bet - just like many others here in UK.d-i-y. Can you say "you must be CORGI-registered to connect your gas cooker"? What about having to have switches above the work surface for the sockets below it?

Time to jump off the soapbox...

regards Alex.

Reply to
atmbelg

It's not a matter of keeping to the letter of the law. There is no law that says I have to show it to leave the country. I don't even have to have it with me to leave the country (not yet, anyway!). There is no law that says that police and customs officers can't ask for it. I do have to identify myself in the port of Dover, if requested to do so by a police officer (Terrorism Act 2000), but I can use other photographic ID. It doesn't have to be my passport (and it wasn't on the ocasion earlier this year when I left my passport in Belgium!).

By the same token, the constable doesn't have to tell me who he is (why should he? there is no law that says he must).

Do I keep to the letter of the law at all times? Pretty much, as long as I know what the law is - there are, after all, some pretty obscure regulations.

Do I get upset if other people don't keep to the law? Depends on the crime.

Do I get upset when people tell me things about the law that aren't true? You bet - just like many others here in UK.d-i-y. Can you say "you must be CORGI-registered to connect your gas cooker"? What about having to have switches above the work surface for the sockets below it?

Time to jump off the soapbox...

regards Alex.

Reply to
atmbelg

I'm not a grumpy old man and I've never heard of Tom Waits either. Having looked him up on the web I'm none the wiser.

I did see 'Off the Wall' a Pink Floyd tribute band at Ripley Castle a few weeks ago and it's a fantastic show. They do a very good interpretation of the music and have put a lot of effort into making their own lights/visuals display.

It is probably one of my only regrets that I didn't take the opportunity to see the real thing in 1994 when I had a very obscure outside chance to do so.

Hey ho.

Reply to
Fitz

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.