Compensation Issue

[andy_art_trigg]

Re: Compensation Issue

Hi Martin, I’m tackling your points as I feel in the mood to and have the time 🙂 I don’t mean them to sound as harsh as sometimes written words can appear.

Martin wrote:I love reading and contributing to this most fascinating thread. It certainly is showing the ‘trade’ in a true light I must say.

Some would argue it shows customers on a true light. All I can see is a genuine debait with some saying pay, others saying to insist on looking at the machine.

Martin wrote:
The overwhelming conclusion that the customer is “trying it on”, a “stunt” and and “fishy” motives? Feelings so profound that some would willingly pay £500 to defend a £50 claim to prove the customer wrong or at least win the argument.

There is no conclusion at all yet, that’s why the thread lives. There is only a “suspicion” that the customer is trying it on. Being prepared to spend £500 defending the truth rather than paying out £50 is something to be proud of not ashamed of. There aren’t enough people prepared to stand up for principles and their rights.
The “overwhelming conclusion” from yourself appears to be that the original poster is to blame and should compensate, that’s not very balanced.

Martin wrote:
Shame on the lot of you then, I hope your ISE customers will not have to suffer through such indignation? God help them 👿

I hope they will have to suffer the same indignation if they phone in and claim the new washer has flooded their kitchen but refuse to let anyone come and look at the machine and instead say they’ll be content with £50

Martin wrote:
(You may have noticed that I come from a different school of business acumen that has stood me well in my 34 years of fair trading and the ability to judge fairly and rationally to all my customers.)

Many have lasted as long without such a casual approach to paying money out. 😉 I understand your greater point that it may not be worth the hassle (which is what many customers rely on of course) but it’s a bit off to imply the op isn’t carrying out “fair trading”. Fair trading doesn’t mean just bowing to all customer demands. Fair is a two-way street. I would expect that “the ability to judge fairly and rationally” should also be extend to the engineer involved, who is in a better position to judge the situation having dealt with the customer personally.

He’s made a perfectly reasonable (and common sense) request to examine the machine (on a Saturday when the cust wont need to take time off work) in order to try and work out how such an event could have occurred when he “didn’t touch the hoses”. Any company that will simply pay money out on demand without getting a chance to examine the product first is either weak or has too much money IMHO.

[kwatt]

Re: Compensation Issue

andy_art_trigg wrote:Any company that will simply pay money out on demand without getting a chance to examine the product first is either weak or has too much money IMHO.

Amen to that!

K.

[Martin]

Re: Compensation Issue

andy_art_trigg wrote:Hi Martin, I’m tackling your points as I feel in the mood to and have the time 🙂

All fine and valid comments from you Andy, Ken and indeed twiggy. I appreciate and value your sentiments. 🙂

Your assumption that I figured the claim as not worth the hassle was correct Andy. It would cost more time and money to investigate and therefore I would ‘put it down to experience’ likely as not and pay up if the customer put the claim in writing. But the greater probability is that squadmans customer will not follow up the £50 compensation claim at all, and we may never get a conclusion to this issue?

The facts of this case are all too typical and many of us have had to face up to it from time to time. And a classic case of “It was working OK until you touched it”- syndrome. Though this particular case is interestingly unique in that the customer is now happy to accept just £50 in compensation for all the hastle (mopping up, time off work etc). = bl**dy bargain I recon, to be rid of it once and for all.

Besides, why bother to call back to investigate the ‘claim’ ? All that extra expense? Arguing the toss as to what, where and why?….. The customer will just keep repeating “It was OK until you touched it!” over and over again, be assured of that.

If the repairer then admits that he indeed was the last person to touch it prior to it failing, how can the argument be turned around to prove he was not to blame? His only hope is to ensure the internal hoses are firmly secured to prevent a re-occurence. To show the customer what preventative measures have been put in place and to appeal to their sense of goodwill in dropping any demand for compensation?

But that will never happen as the customer is refusing access and as long as that situation exists = stalemate.

[Alex]

Re: Compensation Issue

One small thing….

As soon as you put your hand in your pocket, you admit liability.

Alex

[Davecas]

Re: Compensation Issue

Reading the first post in this thread…could it have been the hose from the hot valve that had become dislodged and when tested on rinses it would only fill from the cold valve??
Just a thought??? perhaps customer is correct and calling back what will there be to see apart from customer possibly showing u which hose had `come off`

only pondering!!.st our customers are genuine (luckily) and faced with this situation I would have wanted to view the situation myself..as the “boss” out of hours calls (to suit the customer)to check this sort of situation (catch it in the bud as it were) are the only way as far as i am concerned. Go with Bucket cloth or wet/dry machine ASAP…Customers generally apreciate this approach and it eliminatesthe situation that has occurred here.

Cheers

[Goatboy]

Re: Compensation Issue

I’ve finally had time to read this thread, instead of glossing over it. And my two cents, if anybody cares, are that each case should be judged indivisually.

If I was to put mysen in squadman’s shoes, I’d want to look at the machine myself and would bend over backward to please the customer.

Leaving the customer happy is the important bit!

Until the customer starts being unreasonable. Then the customer can take a run ‘n jump. I think that you can’t let the customer tell you what to do.

Like many of you guys now, I’m eaglely waiting for Squadman’s progress report.

Ps. I’ll be the jude of what is unreasonable too. And that will be a reasonable level of unreasonableness, reasonably anway.

[squadman]

Re: Compensation Issue

Your insurers would be forced to accept liability and pay the claimant in a case such as thisYour insurers would be forced to accept liability and pay the claimant in a case such as this,

Martin have you considered setting up a insurance company ? Using your view as above, for every customer that you had underwritten and who subsequnently had a possible claim you would be paying out! How long would you be in business I wonder. Insurance companies provide cover for the risks that they underwrite and just because someone issues a claim they DO NOT automatically pay out.

Someone has also enquired if the machine was tested on a rinse prior to delivery to the customer. The machine was tested on Various Complete cycles to ensure correct operation with without washloads and with. At the house it was filled on a mixed fill cycle and pumped out and refilled on rinse cycle and pumped out. How could one do anymore I ask ?

As an update I have written to this customer and outlined our position and in particular that they have tampered with the appliance and that they have declined our offer to perform an inspection. I have advised them that the only reasons a hose such as this could become detached under the circumstances is either that the clips were not fitted, which incidentally the customer has already confirmed that they were or that a water pressure problem was the cause but that although we have sympathy with them we cannot be responsible for the water leak.

I have also drawn a comparison that if they had had a new battery and alternator fitted to thier vehilce and subsequently a power steering hose became detached would the garage accept responsibilty?

Martin has made a few suggetsions about just handing money over, consider this Martin. If you had this customer who did not want you to recall and ascess the fault and any resulting damage you have said that you would pay up without any further question just to get rid of the problem. What then if having paid this money which WOULD be deemed as compensation without doubt, that 2 weeks later the hose detaches once again and this time not only floods the place but where this customer has been tampering inside the machine he has caused a fault whereby his spouse requires the services of the local mortuary service ?

How much would you be prepared to pay this time ? Hm !

We have no proof that this hose came off, we have no proof there was any damage ? The customer has no proof that we were or could be responsible, and I can assure you that when the backplate was removed it did not loosen the hose, I don’t know how you remove a Indesit backplate but its my guess you would have to be pretty awkward and hamfisted to foul the hose in the first place.

The onus is on the customer now to not only substanciate his claim but also prove that we were actually responsible in the first place.

I will report when I have heard further chaps

[squadman]

Re: Compensation Issue

Having written to the customer they replied today here is what they said.

I appreciate that you offered to send an engineer on Monday 27th and that I declined you services as:

1. I had investigated and solved the problem myself and
2. I am a self employed Taxx Driver and time is money. I had already spent considerable amounts of time waiting in for the engineer before and after the repair wor was carried out and you will appreciate I spent hours on Saturday drying my home out.

I also understand that the repair work carried out by you did not involve the part of the machine that failed on Saturday, however it does;nt take Einstein to appreciate that during the transporting of the machine the movement caused the hose to become loose and then detach itself when I tried to use it.

I am not saying that this as deliberate or caused by lack of care, however the end result was that I paid you to do a job, in good faith and my home was flooded and I lost a considerbale amount of working time.

I do not consider it unreasonable that instaed of telling me your point of view you should understand mine and reconsider my suggestion of fifty pounds compensation.

Well there we have it, We do have sympathy with the guy, but he has decided that the transportaion of the machine is the sole cause of this incident, How does he know ?

He admits that he declined our services, he also admits to messing with the appliance,

My concerns are not the fifty quid but more over it is a admission of liablity and any subsequent events may be laid at our door as well.
It a load of bother no doubt and paying him the money may be seen as an end to the matter as he has said. But what If having paid him the compensation something else happens, he would be on our backs for whatever that was and any solicitor could say, well they were obviously liable becuase they paid you compensation in the first place and they are also liable for whatever else.

This customer also only reported the kitchen floor origianally but now mentions that his home was flooded,

Any Thoughts?

[andy_art_trigg]

Re: Compensation Issue

Yes, this is why we have public liablity insurance. If the customer is insistant, I would pass him onto them. All liablities should then pass to them.

[Alex]

Re: Compensation Issue

Give him two contacts:-

1 Your insurance company or broker.

2 Your Solicitor.

Tell the customer that ALL correspondence needs to be addressed to them, and you will act under their instructions only. Point out that an accusation has been made against you/your company and you are taking this very seriously, and wish to escalate this. Put a cc at the bottom of your letter citing the name of your solicitors.

Send the letter recorded, then he can see you are taking this seriously.

Alex

[Martin]

Re: Compensation Issue

squadman wrote:Any Thoughts?

Indeed so, and I’m pleased your customer put pen to paper in the way he has because he in so doing has made the whole issue a nonsense.

squadman wrote:I appreciate that you offered to send an engineer on Monday 27th and that I declined you services

In declining your services to investigate the problem he effectively expunged any obligations you may otherwise have had in dealing with the matter.

squadman wrote:I also understand that the repair work carried out by you did not involve the part of the machine that failed on Saturday, however it does;nt take Einstein to appreciate that during the transporting of the machine the movement caused the hose to become loose and then detach itself when I tried to use it.

Pure conjecture (Einstein or not) on his part! It will always remain exactly that now as he continues to decline you access.

squadman wrote:I do not consider it unreasonable that instaed of telling me your point of view you should understand mine and reconsider my suggestion of fifty pounds compensation.

Again he declines your right to reply….. 🙄

squadman wrote:My concerns are not the fifty quid but more over it is a admission of liablity and any subsequent events may be laid at our door as well.

There is no need at all to even consider any compensation and therefore the implication of admission of guilt in so doing is irrelevant. Simply reply, repeating your request to ‘inspect’ the machine if you so wish. Be careful not to acknowledge or refer in your letter to his £50 claim. For example:-

Dear Mr Taxi Driverman,

Thank you for you letter dated (?????)

Further to our immediate response over the problems experienced with your washing machine and your subsequent refusal to allow us access to inspecting the appliance. We therefore cannot determine whether there was a fault with your machine or carry out any remedial rectification should that be the case.

We would like to remind you that all work carried out on your appliance is guaranteed for (? months). And should there be any problems in the future, please do not hesitate to call us.

Yours sincerely

squadman

You can sit back knowing nothing further will happen, and no need to call in your insurers or solicitor either. 😉

[andy_art_trigg]

Re: Compensation Issue

I think in law, it’s possible to pay compensation without accepting liability. Big companies do it all the time. There’s a legal phrase that does the trick somewhere. It’s something to do with “without prejudice” I think.

To me the choices are to continue the battle and be as stubborn as the customer, pay up using the phrase that accepts no liability at all but simply gives a goodwill gesture, or to pass onto public liability insurance which is after all why we have it – so we don’t suffer all this stress.

It’s easy for us to advise do this do that but the OP has to deal with any consequences and stress 🙂

[Goatboy]

Re: Compensation Issue

I could be blunt and crude about what the customer needs…

But I think Martin has it spot on! :tup:

[squadman]

Re: Compensation Issue

Well a second letter has been sent which is along the lines of what Martin suggested. It contains no mention of compensation and it will be interesting to see the response.

I will keep you all updated !

Thank God its the weekend 8)

[kwatt]

Re: Compensation Issue

He’s a chancer.

No proof at all that you were at fault and is just chancing it to see what he can get from you.

Whether there was a fault or not at this point is entirely irrelevant TBH.

K.

[Author]

Posts