Complaints, Handling complaints

Mistakes may occur in day-to-day business, and these give cause for complaints. There might have been a misunderstanding about the goods to be supplied; perhaps the warehouse clerk made an error in addressing the parcel; sometimes a consignment is dispatched too late or delays are caused in transit; damages may have occurred during delivery; a manufacturing defect is discovered when a machine is used. The customer is understandably annoyed.

He will get better results if he takes the trouble to explain his complaint clearly, and to propose ways in which matters can be put right. His company may make mistakes too: firms often have to manage with insufficiently trained personnel or to contend with staff shortage, so mistakes and accidents happen.

It is particularly necessary to exercise tact in handling complaints. A disappointed customer cannot be put off with mere apologies – he is entitled to know how the mistakes will be remedied: when he will receive the goods ordered; what he is to do with the wrong consignment or the damaged goods he received; when he will receive a replacement for his defective machine, or if it can be repaired quickly.

Letter 1.

MATTHEWS & WILSON

Ladies' Clothing

421 Michigan Avenue

Chicago, III.60602

November 22, 1996

GRANT &CLARKSON

148 Mortimer Street

London W1C 37D

Gentlemen:

Thank you for your delivery of ‘Swinger’ dresses which were ordered on November 4. However we wish to draw your attention to two matters.

Of the red dresses supplied one lot of 100(size 12) included clothes of a lighter red than the other sizes. Since we deliver a collection of various sizes to each store, it would be obvious to customers that the clothes are dissimilar. In addition the red belt supplied does not match these dresses. We are returning two of these by separate mail, and would ask you to replace the whole lot by 100 dresses size 12 in the correct colour.

As far as your charges for air freight are concerned, we agree to pay the extra costs which you invoiced. However your costs for packing and insurance must have been lower for air cargo, and we request you to take this fact into consideration and to make an adjustment to the invoice amount. Would you please send us a rectified invoice, reduced accordingly.

We look forward to your dealing with these questions without delay.

Very truly yours.

Wilson.

Letter 2.

GRANT &CLARKSON

148 Mortimer Street

London W1C 37D

MATTHEWS & WILSON

Ladies' Clothing

421 Michigan Avenue

Chicago, III.60602

2ndDecember, 1996

Dear Sirs:

The colour of the dresses about which you complain is indeed lighter than it should be. Apparently this was overlooked by controller responsible. Please accept our apologies for the oversight.

We are sending you a new lot by air this week, and would ask you to return the faulty clothes at your convenience, carriage forward. Alternatively you may keep this lot for sale as seconds at a reduced price of &1,120.

You are perfectly correct in saying that packing and insurance costs are normally less for cargo sent by air. May we remind you, however, in this case your request to send the goods by air was made at very short notice. It was not possible for us to use the lighter air freight packing materials, as most of the dresses were ready for shipment by sea freight (please see our letter of 9thNovember). Furthermore, our insurance is on an open policy at a flat rate, and depends on the value of the goods, not the method of transport. For these reasons our invoice No.14596 dated 15thNovember 1996 is still valid, and we look forward to receiving your remittance when due.

Yours faithfully,

P. Burke

111 White Horse Lane

Austin, TX 78728

8 October 1994

Letter 3.

Director of Consumer Relations

Cincinnati Microwave

One Microwave Plaza

Miami, TX 75249

Dear Director:

I am writing you concerning the purchase and subsequent return of a Waveport 5000 I made on 10 August 1994 in the amount of $225.

On 10 August 1994, I purchased a Waveport 5000 from your company in the amount of $225. This price included a two-day delivery and a 60-day money-back trial offer. The $225 was immediately charged to my Ritz card. However, this product did not perform satisfactorily, and on 15 August, I decided to return the Waveport 5000 to your company. When I spoke to one of your company's representatives by phone, I was informed that the shipping and handling charges, as well as the price of the Waveport 5000, would be credited to my account. I shipped the item by UPX and was notified 19 August of its receipt. Today, October 7, I received a statement for my Ritz card. And as of today, no credit has been applied to my account for either the Waveport 5000 or the shipping and handling charges.

If the Waveport 5000 was charged to my account immediately when I ordered it, I fail to understand why the same promptness was not used in crediting my account immediately upon receipt of the returned item. There is no real excuse for this delay other than someone not wanting to take the necessary time in crediting my account. These finance charges, as well as this letter, could have been avoided if your employees had been as prompt in crediting my account as they were in charging to it. It is not my responsibility to pay for your company's lack of promptness and I rightfully deserve a refund to any and all finance charges that may be applied during this time period.

Your company's quick detection products have greatly helped me in the past, and I would like nothing more than a quick solution for my problem so that I may be a customer of yours in the future.

Sincerely,

John A. Somebody

Encl.: Copies of sales receipt and credit card statement

Date: 2015-12-11; view: 770