- This topic has 26 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 21 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Now before you all jump to his defence may I say I have nothing but admiration for our beloved site administrator BUT I have to disagree with the tone of the recent article “How to get an appliance exchanged?” As I said to K this is a total doom and gloom article that gives the impression that the customer has few if any choices when things go wrong, he speaks very vaguely of the sale of goods act but always in the negative as far as the customer is concerned.
We are in a customer service trade and as such they pay our wages regardless whether they pay us or a company pays us. I know that they can be most irritating and come out with utter garbage but sometimes you have to look at what they are going through, we have all at sometime had to complain over things that have gone wrong or goods that are way below an expected standard and how many of you have been messed about by store assistants trying to tell us that we have to contact the manufacturer? And it’s nothing to do with them.
This in my opinion is the reason for the increase in consumer rights programs and articles; in fact it is because of the way the customer was being treaded by the retail trade that the sale of goods act in its various forms came into being and is being updated so regularly.
I believe that this article shows bias and personal annoyance with the end user and I don’t think we can afford to give advice that, although not wrong, shows none of the positive actions that can be taken by the consumer. Let’s not alienate the public as the manufacturers do but show them we do care and we can be turned to for honest unbiased advice.
Richard Scanlon SnrRe: I think Kwatts wrong
I’m often wrong, it’s nice when people point it out, I just love to argue my case, brightens my day more often than not. 😉
The article is written from my perspective and reflects my take on the issue, it also needs fleshed out a bit. That said, the facts are to my knowledge correct and the article written in a realistic view, not the rose-tinted view of consumer law presented by various magazines, tabloids and consumer programming on TV.
I would argue that, while we are on the consumers side to a degree we are also employed to save the manufacturer money. Whilst that at times is a bit of pain, it is the reality of the situation that anyone carrying out manufacturer service is in and it also presents a bit of a conundrum at times. Many manufacturers and, note I named none on either side of the fence, simply will not exchange an appliance whereas others have no issue with it if we advise that it is a preferential course of action to take. However I know that there are agents that abuse that option when they hit something that’s a bit difficult, or get a difficult customer.
I will generally place the responsibility of that choice squarely with the manufacturer, I will offer an opinion but that is all it is, an opinion. That is what being brought up in a culture that respected the manufacturer and that respect was mirrored back the agent, teaches. You work together and resolve the issue in the best possible fashion for everyone.
The problem is these days that customers seem to think that it is their God given right to have a new appliance the second that something fails on the machine, which in reality is untrue. They also seem to think that having the appliance replaced will be quicker than a repair, which is a falicy at best. In addition they also, in many cases, seem to think that a replacement will solve, magically somehow, any installation issues with a new appliance.
Frankly, I find consumer’s attitudes ludicrous, their expectations way above what they can expect and their perception of reality seriously warped. This article merely serves as a wake-up call for anyone that reads it.
Interestingly, unbeknown to most of you, Richard and I had discussed this subject earlier in IRC and I tried a little experiment with a customer such as this, which proved to be very interesting.
I’m sure MFI wouldn’t mind this too much, sorry guys it was one of yours that called first wanting a swapout. 😉
I had a customer we had been at before and replaced a hose as it had split and the machine was leakin, admittedly not too long ago. However, this call was for a “no spin” fault and unrelated.
Of course the customer wants a new machine as it’s only a few weeks old, so I explain to the chap the facts as per the article I wrote and he actually came around to a repair rather than replacement. So MFI win.
Even if the manufacturer has to pay me another service fee, was that not worth it to save an exchange? You see, there are several points in this little experiment and, before someone says anything I have and could repeat it many times over, but the important one to me is that with the proper information explained correctlty the customer is happy. To me in the end, that’s all that matters.
But i’m more than happy to debate this if you like. 😉
K.
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
Richard,
I can’t find the post you’re refering to – what you been looking at?If I understand the drift of what you’re saying, you are questioning the ease with which manufacturers exchange appliances rather than reparing them?
There are a number of factors at work here.
1) Reduced levels of company service – many manufacturers are struggling to maintain full employed service cover.
2) Reduced levels of parts stocking.So – when the engineer finally gets to the job and hasn’t got the part (7 days dely?), customer is getting really tee’d off. It can be quicker for the manufacturer to replace the appliance than fix it!
Bear in mind that the £250 machine has been sold twice – once to your chosen retailer and then to the customer. So the real cost of the appliance is what £100? £120? Changing it doesn’t really cost them all that much!
The downside of this is that the contract guarantee work (ie the bit WE do as independants) suffers as well. No parts? Delayed call? Well, lets replace it. The upshot is that the agent only gets half fee – given that most contract work is still under £40 a call, and you only get half fee for a BER/Replacement (ie – you’re making a loss) @ (say)£17.50 – £20 for a call that’s taken out of your control! Let’s face it, it costs me just over £22 to ring a customers door bell, and I, like you, am an independant. Those with more involved overheads and staff are paying more.
The problem does not lie with Ken, it lies with inadequate service cover, poor parts availibilty and perceived expense – something we touched on in the “Vision” thread. And it’s very wrong that we lose out as a consequence – it’s nothing to do with us that parts are not available; so why should we be punished for the incompetancy of the manufacturer?
Chris.
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
Interesting stuff, but hardly applies to us as we have no problems at all with customers who “want” something.
We listen and advised the best course of action open to them. Not sure where the 30{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} comes from, for us its not even 1{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} who demand an exchange. We are happy to provide the Manufacturer contact details and provide service history for a decision to be made.
Of course they then exchange the appliance and don’t cancle the backorder spare or even have the decency to tell you they’ve exchanged, but thats another story.
kevin
Kev, it’s primarily warranty calls that are affected and extended warranties that are percieved by the customer to be held by the manufacturer. However, customers seem to think that there is no cost attached to simply giving them a new one (whatever it is). They do appreciate that whilst the appliance’s cost is low so is the profit on it, for most retailers at least and to a large extent manufacturers is way out of proportion with the profit earned. If they end up replacing upon ever request they would be in a loss situation.
But then if they built the things better in the first place and stopped producing 15 different ways to do the same thing then we’d have a far better chance at a first fix as Penguin rightly points out. So I’ve little sympathy for the manufacturers ass they’ve brought it on themselves, I just don’t want the earache from the customer about it as they mistakenly think that we can wave a magic wand and have them a new machine. Many of them actually expect us to carry a replacement appliance in the van!
K.
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
RS wrote: As I said to K this is a total doom and gloom article that gives the impression that the customer has few if any choices when things go wrong, he speaks very vaguely of the sale of goods act but always in the negative as far as the customer is concerned.
Richard does have a point here about this extensively written article you know, negative in the extreme, for example: –
As this article was written in October 2004 we have, as service agents, noticed an alarming trend amongst consumers to try and force an exchange should an appliance break down both under warranty and extended warranty. In fact, I would guess that at least 30{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} of our customers request a new appliance straight out the gate, before it’s even been looked at. We get all manner of complaints and I hate to tell you this but we’ve probably heard all the stories before many times over.
As Richard points out, we are indeed in the customer service trade and should be shown to be on their side on ‘the customer is always right’ principle. We shouldn’t, however tempted we all may be sometimes, give our precious customer too much information on the inner workings of the trade in this regard. I believe it could generate greater missunderstandings and ill feelings, widening the gap between consumer and manufacturer even more.
I am sure the authors intention was further continuance of yet more accurate comprehensive information that is the watchword of UKWhitegoods. Unfortuneately whilst the article is comprehensively written and encompasses all aspects before the public at large. It does indeed expose bias and certain ill feeling behind the scenes, all made public, warts and all. That indeed could have the opposite effect and alienate the public at large even more.
If the article does remain I would like these examples deleted :-
We also get customers on the phone screaming and shouting about getting a new appliance, but if you are relying on the engineer’s opinion to aid your position, then is not “having a go at him” a bit counter productive? The engineers will almost universally try to help customers obtain the best possible outcome, we are not in there for any other reason and, frankly, it is often totally inconsequential to the engineer whether a product is exchanged or not but we would only recommend and exchange in extreme circumstances. But it should be obvious that having a go at the engineer will not serve any purpose other than to hinder you.
….and… :-
If you refuse the repair then get ready for a bit of a battle as you will probably be coerced into having the repairs carried out. If you really want an exchange you’ll have to tough it out without the use of the machine until such times as the matter is resolved and with many retailers and manufacturers, don’t expect it to happen quickly or by itself.
Those examples alone will incite even more to scream down the phone I reckon, possibly not even bother to phone a service agent but to call their lawyer instead (cut out the middleman so to speak). I think its time for a rethink for this article and put my hand up alongside Richard. 🙄Martin
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
Actually I totally disagree Martin.
In 20 years of working in manufacturer service I have learned that there is one thing that customers respect above all else and expect from our businesses and employees… honesty!
Whilst the truth of the matter may not suit customers and they may not like being faced with it, it is nonetheless the truth.
If I cock it up I will tell a customer, quite openly, that I have done so as we’re all human and we do make mistakes and in virtually every instance the customer respects that far more than being fed a line. I have applied that principle for years, some customers don’t like it when you tell them the facts but most of them a least respect your honesty and integrity in telling them straight.
The problem is that we have people like Which and Watchdog banging the consumer rights drum and, basically, misleading people a lot of the time by glamourising the complaints process, very often reporting the ones that they win only. This to me is highly dangerous, Which are interested in circulation figures and Watchdog are interested in viewing numbers so both have an agenda to fulfill, I do not.
If I had a fiver for every time I heard “I’m getting onto Watchdog about this” I would indeed be a rich man by now. Such is live as a manufacturer’s agent sadly. But I have to note that even many of the problems that I consider to be justified in some measure never seem to appear in the press or on the TV at all. The reason is simple, it’s not tasty enough for the media to pick up on it and they don’t care unless they think they’re onto something big. They are also only too aware of UK consumer law and also know that instance where many of the manufacturers fail to resolve a problem correctly within that framework is very, very small.
UK customers in relation to other countries and what they actually pay for service get a pretty good deal all things considered, but it comes down to just that, money. You have to ask, is the level of service that the customer expects, or demands, being paid for by the customer (ultimately) or the manufacturer? I can tell you now that the almost universal answer is “no” to that question.
When it comes to the exchange process it is under warranty stuff, not the same type of customer that both yourself and Richard deal with which will be largley out of warranty chargeable repairs, that’s a whole other ball game. The customers expectations of what you do are entirely different to say what they expect from a large company like Electrolux, MFI or any other brand name and mostly those expectations are just stupid.
The mantra that “the customer is always right” only stretches so far. For example, first thing this morning I had a message on the answering machine from a customer that we called to yesterday, £500 integrated washer that had a pump in it 3 months or so ago and now needs a PCB for a no-spin fault, unsurprisingly she was demanding an exchange. I explained the facts to her as detailed in that article, explained that to get a replacement would likely take at least two weeks or so and you know what? She now is perfectly happy to accept a repair rather than a replacement, she’s even off to take out the extended warranty on the machine too which is great for me as I get any work under that as well.
So no, often telling the customer the truth is very often, as the old saying goes, the best policy.
K.
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
kwatt wrote:So no, often telling the customer the truth is very often, as the old saying goes, the best policy.
It’s an applaudable principle to adhere to and we all try to maintain such, of course, in our daily business dealings. This however is not really the point to which Richard and myself were trying to make clear here.
kwatt wrote:I would argue that, while we are on the consumers side to a degree we are also employed to save the manufacturer money.
The point as you readily admit by that statement is all too clear and if I may say so, somewhat contradictory to the suggest all the ‘warts and all’ of our dealings with manufacturers/wp’s should then be exposed in this way. And that “we are on the customers side to a degree” must be yet
another principle to adopt. Dont forget that we are dealing with at least two camps here and I believe it is wrong to ‘lay bare’ all that goes on behind the scenes in this way. Tell them what is relevant, when it is appropriate to do so in order to maintain full and lasting relationships within interested parties.I will sit back and wait with interest as to the views of others, should they wish to do so, especially the thoughts of the manufacturers, who, unlike Joe Public, will be able to read and take notes from this forum. Perhaps even comment???
Who knows 🙂
Martin
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
There’s many a way to save the client money Martin as you well know, be that an end-user or a corporate client so I don’t see a contradiction in trying to appease both camps to the best of your ability. On occasion there is a conflict, but he who pays the piper…
The thing is and, I guess the core of the whole problem, is that consumers due to an increase in “supposed” knowledge gleaned from snippets in the media have become increasingly hostile over the past few years. This is in no way simply restricted to our trade in any way, it affects many others as well. This is purely down to the media and a lot of large businesses perpetuating the ethos that they look after their customers to the Nth degree when the reality is usually not what is in the glossy ads and many of the promises are not delivered.
Service costs money and it also takes a dedicated and motivated staff to get it right, something that has always been a failing of large companies in our and other walks of life. Where you have a small team that are trying to earn a crust, like we independents, the level of customer care, attention and information given to a customer rises considerably. Just as I am sure both youself and Richard look after your customers very well indeed, after all they put food on the table. We have to apply that to corporate clients as well as end-users and balance the level of care. However, the level of care required for many warranty customers, with their unrealistic expectations to start with, simply cannot be met on the rates that we get paid, it’s just that simple and it is the reality that we all have to live with, manufacturers included.
Now at that point you have to decide, to be open and honest and tell the customers that they are being unrealistic or do you string them along in the hope that the problem will go away?
Personally I don’t hide my head in the sand and the majority of customers I talk to accept and appreciate that.
K.
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
I have to say K that I am a little disappointed that you did not admit that this article was written in a fit of pique and that you dismiss so off handedly constructive criticisms from Martin. This thread is not just for those who do warranty work, as we all get asked for our advice on a daily basis and being honest with the customer is to my mind of paramount importance without as Martin says giving too much away.
The article itself bears very little resemblance to the actual sale of goods act; in fact I would go as far as to say it is totally misleading with regards to the customer’s rights. Any old dear reading that would more than likely just give up pursuing a legitimate claim. There is nothing pointing them towards factual info on the subject just the word according to K, no reference to the CAB or trading standards or the act itself.
Neither do you say that by accepting a repair it undermines any future claims, I really do believe that this article was in itself a very good idea but maybe due to your obvious bias you should have thrown it open to see if someone wanted to do an informative unbiased article that would have been welcomed by all, you speak of truths but what I see is your opinions and we must never get the two mixed up for everyone’s sake
Richard Scanlon SnrRe: I think Kwatts wrong
In actual fact Trading Standards is mentioned.
I have not off-handedly dismissed Martin’s comments at all but I have answered his points and explained why I wrote the article in the manner in which I did. Quite comprehensively I thought.
This thread is not just for those doing warranty work, but the actual workings of the exchange proccess and how it actually works in the real world does only affect those of us carrying out warranty or extended warranty work in some cases. The Sale Of Goods Act merely sets down the principals on which consumer law is based, it is a guide with basic principals for consumer care set in law. However, the real world translation of how the law is used is often very different to the spirit in which it was written.
You are correct it is important to look after the customer, but at what cost? Should it bankrupt you or the manufacturer to adhere to that? Where do you draw the line? Are you saying that every customer that requests a new appliance should get it as that is, in effect, what would happen?
UK consumer law is actually ahead of the much feared and totally toothless (IMO) EU Directive that everyone thought was going to herald the adoption of the 2-year warranty. It turns out that it didn’t do that, it was two years to prove a manufacturing defect from supply date, in the UK the customer actually has up to six years to do this.
What has changed is that the onus is now on the manufacturer to prove that there wasn’t a fault whereas before the customer had to prove that there was. What this has led to is a breed of far more aggresive customers out there that know, or think they do, their rights and are very adept at rattling the consumer legislation sabre in the hope that they just get what they want.
It is my opinion that consumer law has swung very much in favour of the customer and they are extremely well protected in the UK and that in itself is no bad thing. What is bad is the way that customers approach a failure, which is more often than not, with quite an aggresive stance and making demands of the service company which are not realistic. As I previously stated this has been perpetuated by, primarily, the media who also misrepresent to an extent just how it all works.
Just look at the Benoit Milner case, all that hullabulloo about the tumble dryer going on fire, on Watchdog and here then it goes totally silent, no result at all. Why? Well either Whirlpool paid out to shut her up or she was proved to be in the wrong, it’s the only two possible explanation’s that I can see. But look at the tone of her posts, look at the interview she gave on Watchdog, but no mention of the fact that she had no insurance, no mention of the fact that the appliance was left on unattended, but loads of mention of how bad the big bad Whirlpool was. Whilst there’s not a lot of love lost between myself and Whirlpool I can understand the stance they took and, for once, I actually agree with them but I still treated the customer with kid gloves. Had I chosen, I could have been quite scathing and brutal about it.
Its all very well championing the cause of the customer, but it has to be a balanced like any other argument and up until now I can’t see anyone offering any sort of balance at all in the media or anywhere else for that matter. To simply say that the customer is always correct and should always get their way is insane IMO, customers are often wrong and often misinformed and, these days, very demanding. Couple that with the margins that we have to work with and the demands that they place on us are, in many cases, impossible to fulfill.
But get a wrong price on a product, i.e. make a genuine mistake, on the internet and thousands will take advantage of it at the retailer or manufacturers cost and then demand that the deal is fullfilled. Then they’ll complain if it breaks down and demand a replacement, which by your standards you would give them I assume?
At the first opportunity many will also sue you or demand other concetions be made to them and it’s sad, but that’s the culture we now live in I’m afraid. They will twist what you tell them, or the engineer tells them to get their way and allsorts but you will have little or no experience of that sort of situation and its not because the job is done badly more often than not. So in many ways we are forced to regard the customer as being hostile, by the customers and then try not to treat them likewise. 🙁
K.
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
Ken,
You are clearly missing the point here, possibly totally missing the point 🙁 IMHO.
Richard and I are simply saying that your ‘article’ should be dramatically edited to remove the obvious bias you have with the trade in general. Now, before you missunderstand even the first part of my opening statement, please read on…..
Both Richard and I are on your side of the fence, first off, don’t forget that. :lesson: BUT you are (forgive me here 😳 ) going on about ‘Sale of Goods act’ & ‘EU directives’ ‘ UK Consumer Law’ even, all of which we fully agree is part and parcel of our business. BUT not relevant or bares any part of what is relevant in this case.
We are simply asking you to tone down the content of that article so as not to exacerbate ill feeling and missunderstandings between ALL interested parties. To show real neutrality based on fact of what one can and can’t do, what one can and cannot expect.
Sadly, and possibly acting somewhat hastily, before waiting for “OTHERS” to comment 😈 (to back us up here for Christ sake 🙂 ) I should rewrite your article to see which bits I would edit out ❓
Maybe I will take time to do that with respect to you Ken for holding your corner so stalwartly 🙂
Martin
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
Nope, I haven’t missed the point at all.
You two have missed a very important one though. 😉
Whilst you may not think that the tone is politically correct it has made you both stop, think and indeed post much comment on the tone, not the content.
If customers stop and think alone then the article has served its purpose and, like any written piece, if it got the readers attention whether through controversy or not, it has served its purpose as they listened and took note! Sometimes you have to shake it up a bit to achieve that goal.
And of course it’s going to biased, almost any literary work is by the author that you care to name, either by opinion or experience. Added to which I am a great anit-political correctness advocate, so there’s the result.
Had I written a nicey, nice article about consumer law the audience would have been asleep by the end of paragraph one as really, it’s dead boring. By using the glamourisation tactics employed by the media, it gets attention. Simple.
Just look around the site, which posts get the most attention? The most provocative and the most controvertial that’s the ones that get people’s attention and capture their imagination. One’s like this in fact.
It makes people think about it. Mission accomplished.
And we’ve had a nice chat about it too. 😉
K.
Re: I think Kwatts wrong
Ken,
OK I think you will agree at least that 2 members of UKW do not fully agree with ‘that’ article in its entirety. Although we concede it is the Administrators right to publish whatever he thinks fit for public consumption by so doing. But perhaps he may just stop for a moment and consider that PERHAPS it doesn’t fully represent the feelings of the trade ‘per se?’
kwatt wrote:And we’ve had a nice chat about it too.
Is this the point where we must draw a veil over the subject then?..Hope not 🙂
Lets just see if anyone else ‘dares’ to comment, for or against anyhow 😯
Martin
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.