A certain computer company, and why their customer support sucks!

[JThunder]

Here’s the scoop. Last week, the power adapter for my new laptop broke down. So… I called the manufacturer, and they agreed to send me a new unit. When I asked when I can expect to receive it, they said, “We’ll be sending it on Friday, so you can expect to receive it soon.”

When Friday came, I called to ask for a tracking number for this package. After some bustling about, their call center representative told me, “Oh, we don’t have the part in stock. It’s on backorder. We don’t know when we’ll be receiving it.”

JThunder: “WHAT?!?!?!” I said. “You don’t have it in stock? Then why did you tell me that sooner? That way, I could have made alternate arrangements, if necessary.”

Customer service: “We had no way of knowing. Our ordering system doesn’t let us check inventory levels.”

JThunder: “Then why did you assure me that it would be shipped on Friday, if you didn’t even know if you had it in stock?”

Customer service: “Well, we had to tell you something. We had to give you a timeframe, right? Would you rather that we didn’t tell you anything?”

JThunder: “Then why not say, ‘We expect to ship it on Friday, if we have the item in stock’? Or how about ‘We’ll have to see if we have the item in our warehouse. If we do, then we can send it to you this week’? Is that so hard?”

Customer service: “Well, we’re not fortune tellers.”

JThunder: (Exasperated) “Yes, yes. I know that… but your response made it sound as though you had the part on hand, when you didn’t know that was the case.”

Customer service: “It’s company policy. We have to tell you something, and so we give you a timeframe.”

JThunder: “So your policy is to tell your customers that a part is shipping out on a given date, regardless of whether you have it in stock or not?”

Customer service: “That’s how our procedures work. It’s our international policy. I can’t change this.”

JThunder: “Then your procedures are wrong.”

Customer service: “Well, the customer should know that we don’t know if a part is in stock or not. That’s just understood.”

JThunder: “Nonsense. There are plenty of companies that can have computerized inventory systems, and that can look these things up immediately. If your system doesn’t work that way, that’s fine… but if so, you need to tell the customers that you need to verify part availability first.”

Customer service: (Clearly missing the point) “Well, this is how it works. We first place an order with our warehouse. After that, we don’t hear from them until the part is delivered. That’s just how it works.”

JThunder: "I don’t care. That doesn’t excuse telling your customers that a part will be delivered on Friday, if you don’t even know if you have it on hand.

Customer service: “Well, that’s how it works. I’m not a fortune teller.”

AAARRRGGGHHHH!

I really don’t think this customer service rep had any clue as to why I was so agitated.

[Stratocaster]

@JThunder

I really don’t think this customer service rep had any clue as to why I was so agitated.

Yeesh. That’s for sure. “I’m not a fortune teller” equals “Why doesn’t this guy get it that there is no way we could know if the part was in stock?” Clearly this “customer service” rep was missing your (clearly stated) point. Nothing is more frustrating than the eye rolling of the company rep who is exasperated over your inability to understand their convoluted policies…

[Tuckerfan]

You should have pointed out to the CSR that a computer company with a computer system as clearly inadequate as their’s is, is a clear signal that they don’t know what the fuck they’re doing.

Of course, it’s not the poor CSR’s fault. They’re strapped to a PC for at least 8 hours a day, and when a customer has a problem caused by the halfwits running the company, it’s the CSR who’s got to take the flack for it. If upper management had to deal with just one of those calls a day, they’d make some changes to the set up.

[JThunder]

@Tuckerfan

You should have pointed out to the CSR that a computer company with a computer system as clearly inadequate as their’s is, is a clear signal that they don’t know what the fuck they’re doing.

Darn right.

Now, I understand if their inventory tracking system isn’t up-to-date. After all, it takes time to implement company-wide changes. However, this still means that their personnel have to give the customers realistic expectations.

Of course, even with an antiquated inventory system, they should at least receive SOME sort of acknowledgement from the warehouse when they place an order. That’s pretty common practice, and hardly high-tech.

Of course, it’s not the poor CSR’s fault. They’re strapped to a PC for at least 8 hours a day, and when a customer has a problem caused by the halfwits running the company, it’s the CSR who’s got to take the flack for it. If upper management had to deal with just one of those calls a day, they’d make some changes to the set up.

I’m sure.

Of course, the proper thing to do would have been to take the customer’s complaints, and forward them to the appropriate authorities in the company. In all likelihood though, this CSR was just thinking about their own local operations. “We’re doing everything the way Toshiba tells us to do them, so we’re off the hook,” they doubtlessly think. “The customer needs to understand that.”

[Tuckerfan]

@JThunder

Of course, the proper thing to do would have been to take the customer’s complaints, and forward them to the appropriate authorities in the company. In all likelihood though, this CSR was just thinking about their own local operations. “We’re doing everything the way Toshiba tells us to do them, so we’re off the hook,” they doubtlessly think. “The customer needs to understand that.”

Assuming, of course, that they have some way of forwarding the complaint. One of the shithole CSR jobs I had didn’t have that option, and it was a large, telcom. (They had the same kind of crappy inventory system as well.)

[fluiddruid]

What would you like him to have done (since a lot of the complaints are aimed at the representative)? I ask because I’m in customer service, too, and he was in a challenging position. After all, he can’t change the policy – he can’t make the part appear if they don’t have it, either.

If your rendition is accurate, I would have expected some apologizing rather than just the excuses, and possibly offering to send your complaint on to the appropriate channels. Otherwise, I don’t see what else he could do for you. I think he understood what you were saying – I just don’t think he could do anything about it.

[JThunder]

@fluiddruid

What would you like him to have done (since a lot of the complaints are aimed at the representative)? I ask because I’m in customer service, too, and he was in a challenging position. After all, he can’t change the policy – he can’t make the part appear if they don’t have it, either.

If your rendition is accurate, I would have expected some apologizing rather than just the excuses, and possibly offering to send your complaint on to the appropriate channels

Two things: (1) Send this complaint through the appropriate channels, as you described (and as I mentioned earlier). (2) As I also mentioend, caution their CSRs not to promise shipping by a given date, if they still need to verify part availability.

I refuse to believe that their procedures are so detailed and inflexible as to preclude using cautionary statements such as “Now, we don’t yet know if the part is in stock, but if it is…”

[JThunder]

@fluiddruid

I think he understood what you were saying – I just don’t think he could do anything about it.

I don’t think she did, as evidenced by her repeated statements of “I’m not a fortune-teller” and “We had to tell you something. We had to give you a timeline.”

[fluiddruid]

I’m sorry, Jthunder, I was just about to post that I missed that later post was from you.

Yes, I agree that would have been nice - but as someone else said, what if that option wasn’t available? This individual agent couldn’t tell other CSRs what to tell customers, either.

If parts go on backorder all the time, yes, it would be nice to say that. However, I’m banking on that it’s simply a bad decision to tell people that their part will be shipped if it’s available. Then, MANY customers – many more than actually have backordered parts, I’ll warrant – will ask if the part is available. The rep won’t know. The person will keep calling back to find out, or will be mad right off the bat. Unfortunately, it didn’t help you, but I bet it probably helps the general service of most customers.

In my company, we take thousands and thousands of orders in a day. A very small number of these will backorder – usually only for a few days. Should we tell every caller that there is a possibility our order will backorder? Should we also tell customers that it is possible that their package could be lost in the mail, or stolen from their mailbox, or that conditions (like hurricanes) could delay delivery, or that if their credit card doesn’t work the order won’t ship? We can’t tell everyone every possible outcome on every call. And, for each of the above problems, I’ve been reamed out when I was a customer service agent by a customer who said that they weren’t told that it was a possibility, so our service was terrible, I was a bad person, I am doing a bad job in my work, I didn’t help them, etc.

Yes, he should have apologized. Yes, you’re free to take your business to a company that has a more modern inventory/ordering system. I don’t think the representative showed you much empathy, which is irritating. I’m just saying that maybe your expectations wouldn’t really fit a customer service model for all of their customers.

[JThunder]

@fluiddruid

Yes, I agree that would have been nice - but as someone else said, what if that option wasn’t available? This individual agent couldn’t tell other CSRs what to tell customers, either.

She might not be able to command the other CSRs to do that, but she can pass the feedback on to her immediate superior, who does have that authority.

If parts go on backorder all the time, yes, it would be nice to say that. However, I’m banking on that it’s simply a bad decision to tell people that their part will be shipped if it’s available. Then, MANY customers – many more than actually have backordered parts, I’ll warrant – will ask if the part is available. The rep won’t know. The person will keep calling back to find out, or will be mad right off the bat. Unfortunately, it didn’t help you, but I bet it probably helps the general service of most customers.

It may be less convenient, but it is more truthful. There lies the difference.

In my company, we take thousands and thousands of orders in a day. A very small number of these will backorder – usually only for a few days. Should we tell every caller that there is a possibility our order will backorder?

In the name of accuracy, yes. If your inventory system doesn’t allow you to determine if a part is in stock, then this needs to be made clear to the customer. The alternative is to be inaccurate, with possibly disastrous consequences for the customer.

Should we also tell customers that it is possible that their package could be lost in the mail, or stolen from their mailbox, or that conditions (like hurricanes) could delay delivery, or that if their credit card doesn’t work the order won’t ship? We can’t tell everyone every possible outcome on every call.

No, but those things are beyond the company’s control. In contrast, part availability is something which they should know, or should be able to verify.

Yes, people should know that natural disasters can occur, as can outright theft. This does not need to be spelled out for most customers. This situation is vastly different, though. It is entirely reasonable for a customer to expect that a company would know if they have a part in stock, or for that company to notify them if that turns out to be untrue. Alternately, it is reasonable for a company to give their customers the standard disclaimers which apply in this case.

Heck, whenever I take my car to the shop for repairs, the mechanics are quick to clarify that their estimates are based on whether they have the parts in stock or not. It’s really not that difficult.

Yes, he should have apologized. Yes, you’re free to take your business to a company that has a more modern inventory/ordering system. I don’t think the representative showed you much empathy, which is irritating. I’m just saying that maybe your expectations wouldn’t really fit a customer service model for all of their customers.

I disagree. These expectations would serve all of their customers perfectly well. It would be less convenient for the company, but that’s their problem. Convenience does not excuse inaccuracy.

What if the customer needs to have that part in by a given date? If the company cautions the consumer that this part might not be available, then the customer can plan accordingly. An unexpected delay can have dire consequences.

The company isn’t doing its customers any favors by hiding the truth.

[Giraffe]

@fluiddruid

What would you like him to have done (since a lot of the complaints are aimed at the representative)? I ask because I’m in customer service, too, and he was in a challenging position. After all, he can’t change the policy – he can’t make the part appear if they don’t have it, either.

If your rendition is accurate, I would have expected some apologizing rather than just the excuses, and possibly offering to send your complaint on to the appropriate channels. Otherwise, I don’t see what else he could do for you. I think he understood what you were saying – I just don’t think he could do anything about it.

This is one of my biggest problems with life in our ever more corporate world. I know the poor bastard on the other end of the phone is getting paid jack shit to get yelled at all day, without having any real ability to communicate my problem to someone with the authority to change things. I know the high school kid making $6/hour at Best Buy doesn’t know shit about most of the stuff he sells and doesn’t really care.

Because I know this, I’m always nice to these people, even though they are the representatives of the company giving me shitty service. Companies surround themselves with a human shield of people getting paid nothing to take abuse, so your options are to lower your customer service expectations or shout at some poor bastard who doesn’t have the training to understand your problems or the authority to fix them. It’s sad.

(OK, on preview I see that there have been several posts since I wrote this, so this may be somewhat irrelevant to the current discussion. Lucky for all of you, I’m submitting it anyway. Yee haw!)

[Giraffe]

Incidentally, why aren’t you posting the name of the company? There’s nothing wrong with complaining about a specific company that gave you bad service, is there?

[fluiddruid]

@JThunder

She might not be able to command the other CSRs to do that, but she can pass the feedback on to her immediate superior, who does have that authority.

I would lay odds that the supervisor cannot change a company policy. Changing something that every representative says takes a lot of work, actually, and would have to be approved by the higher-ups. Most of what customer service representatives say is scripted or at least heavily influenced by the company’s rating system and policies.

If your inventory system doesn’t allow you to determine if a part is in stock, then this needs to be made clear to the customer. The alternative is to be inaccurate, with possibly disastrous consequences for the customer… It is entirely reasonable for a customer to expect that a company would know if they have a part in stock, or for that company to notify them if that turns out to be untrue.

The problem is that in customer service, for most companies, the market will not bear this. Notifying customers is incredibly costly and time consuming. Are you willing to pay a lot more for products that have good customer service? Sadly, most Americans won’t.

Most companies that I’ve ordered from or had experience do not tell you about the backorder status before the order is placed.

Alternately, it is reasonable for a company to give their customers the standard disclaimers which apply in this case.

You see a strong difference between items backordering and lost packages. To be honest with you, most customers I’ve dealt with don’t see the difference. To them, they have paid to receive a package by a certain time. It does not matter the reason - if they don’t have it, it’s our fault.

I am not kidding. I have had people tell me that because their package was lost, that I should get in the car and leave my job – regardless of company policy – and drive it to their house several states away. A lot of people have very little touch with reality, costs, etc. and just respond with “but I NEEDED it!!!” regardless of the reason.

To you, it’s standard. To this company, obviously not. I think service would be better if they could tell you if the product is in stock, yes. But, everything has a cost. Many companies don’t have the capability to give every representative access to their inventory. We just implemented it, and it’s still not in real time - it updates every few days.

I disagree. These expectations would serve all of their customers perfectly well. It would be less convenient for the company, but that’s their problem. Convenience does not excuse inaccuracy.

The perception of the service is what’s important, and the perception would indeed be less, I wager. Customers would be furious that they couldn’t check if a part was available after being told it might not be available. Many more customers would be unhappy (because of the now standard disclaimer on a calls) than would be happy (people who did backorder) – this to me is why they’ve made the decision to do it this way. To top it off it would be much more expensive - call length and number of calls would increase, which cost money, and this too must be passed on to the customers.

I don’t think it’s wholly unreasonable to try to please the largest number of customers possible.

What if the customer needs to have that part in by a given date? If the company cautions the consumer that this part might not be available, then the customer can plan accordingly. An unexpected delay can have dire consequences.

The same circumstances might occur with the package being lost in the mail. I honestly take in backorder as part of my concern with any mail order. I do a lot of business with deepdiscountdvd.com which backorders frequently. Do they tell you that a lot of orders backorder? No. Do they notify you if there’s a backorder? No. They keep prices down and that’s why I order.

(To be fair, our company does mail people when items backorder beyond a certain amount of time, but it’s not instantaneous. Otherwise, many people would get the backorder cards after their orders. Calling the customer back isn’t really financially feasible.)

Would you have done anything differently if they said “if the part is available…” before giving you the timeframe? I’m curious.

[rolandgunslinger]

I bet the company rymes with “Hateway”

[JThunder]

@fluiddruid

I would lay odds that the supervisor cannot change a company policy. Changing something that every representative says takes a lot of work, actually, and would have to be approved by the higher-ups. Most of what customer service representatives say is scripted or at least heavily influenced by the company’s rating system and policies.

I don’t buy it. If the supervisor is in charge of the CSRs, then that supervisor should have at least some discretion in that manner. I refuse to believe that every single word that the CSRs utter is scripted.

And even if it is, the CSR can at least offer to discuss it with her supervisor, and let the supervisor take it from there. It’s far better than saying “That’s just the way our system works!”

Heck, at the very least, this CSR can at least acknowledge that the system has failed miserably, instead of insisting that everything was done properly.

The problem is that in customer service, for most companies, the market will not bear this. Notifying customers is incredibly costly and time consuming. Are you willing to pay a lot more for products that have good customer service? Sadly, most Americans won’t.

That does NOT justify being dishonest with the customers. It does not justify telling the customers “We’ll ship your part out on Friday” if they don’t even know if the part is available.

At the very least, the CSR can say that they’ll let the customer know when the part will be shipped. This can even be done electronically, via e-mail. Either option is infinitely preferable to giving the customer false assurances.

Most companies that I’ve ordered from or had experience do not tell you about the backorder status before the order is placed.

But they will at least notify you AFTER said order is in the queue. This company did NEITHER.

As I explicitly said, I can understand if their system doesn’t allow them to determine if a part is in stock. Not all inventory systems are up-to-date in that manner. Nevertheless, this does not justify withholding vital information from the customer.

You see a strong difference between items backordering and lost packages. To be honest with you, most customers I’ve dealt with don’t see the difference. To them, they have paid to receive a package by a certain time. It does not matter the reason - if they don’t have it, it’s our fault.

Perhaps, but that’s simply irrelevant to the topic at hand.

We are NOT talking about lost packages. We are NOT talking about hurricanes, or postal theft, or any such matter. We are NOT talking about circumstances which are beyond the company’s control. We are talking about the company’s OWN inventory, and the measures they take to notify the customers when delivery will be made. The issue of lost packages is cute and interesting, but irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Business deals are MADE or LOST because of matters like this. Jobs are won or lost. Careers are made, or flushed down the toilet. That is why there is NO justification for telling a customer that a part will be shipped out on October 1st, 2004, if you don’t even know if that component is available.

I don’t think it’s wholly unreasonable to try to please the largest number of customers possible.

It is unreasonable, if it involves being deceptive with the disenfranchised few.

Would you have done anything differently if they said “if the part is available…” before giving you the timeframe? I’m curious.

Absolutely. I would have chosen to follow up in a couple of days, to see if the part was on its way. And if it wasn’t, I would have chosen to locate an alternate source, if possible. Heck, I would have tried to rent, borrow or buy a new laptop, if absolutely necessary.

I understand that you’re concerned about saving time and money, but this is no justification for deceiving the customer.

[JThunder]

@Giraffe

This is one of my biggest problems with life in our ever more corporate world. I know the poor bastard on the other end of the phone is getting paid jack shit to get yelled at all day, without having any real ability to communicate my problem to someone with the authority to change things. I know the high school kid making $6/hour at Best Buy doesn’t know shit about most of the stuff he sells and doesn’t really care.

Because I know this, I’m always nice to these people, even though they are the representatives of the company giving me shitty service.

I’m nice to them IF they’re doing their job. I was nice to the poor tech support guys who helped me diagnose this problem. I was even nice to the fellow who first (apologetically!) informed me that their system wasn’t set up to inform them of inventory status and the like. I even called their customer service department to commend these fine gents for the job they did.

However, I have decidedly less patience with the CSRs who attempt to make excuses for these types of breakdowns. It’s one thing to admit that there was a failure in their system. It’s another thing to utter stupid statements like “Well, said it would ship on Friday because we had to tell you something!” And when the CSR repeatedly excuses these breakdowns on the grounds that she “is not a fortune-teller,” then I have little sympathy left for their cause.

[fluiddruid]

@JThunder

I don’t buy it. If the supervisor is in charge of the CSRs, then that supervisor should have at least some discretion in that manner. I refuse to believe that every single word that the CSRs utter is scripted.

Not everything is, of course. But a lot of it is. I am simply speaking from experience that, if you were talking about my company, it would be a markdown on the agent if they didn’t give the timeframe that the company mandates. You can choose to believe that or not.

And even if it is, the CSR can at least offer to discuss it with her supervisor, and let the supervisor take it from there. It’s far better than saying “That’s just the way our system works!” Heck, at the very least, this CSR can at least acknowledge that the system has failed miserably, instead of insisting that everything was done properly.

I agree. See my above posts.

At the very least, the CSR can say that they’ll let the customer know when the part will be shipped. This can even be done electronically, via e-mail. Either option is infinitely preferable to giving the customer false assurances.

Again, more information and notification is nice. But it costs money. Would you seek out and purchase from a company who had such a system? Most customers won’t.

That does NOT justify being dishonest with the customers. It does not justify telling the customers “We’ll ship your part out on Friday” if they don’t even know if the part is available.

I’m sure a lot of companies say when you order packages that “you will receive this in (X amount of time)”. Some customers won’t – because their credit card wouldn’t accept the charges, packages are lost, etc. Is the company lying? Or are they just simplifying to make it information accurate for most customers?

We are NOT talking about lost packages. We are NOT talking about hurricanes, or postal theft, or any such matter. We are NOT talking about circumstances which are beyond the company’s control. We are talking about the company’s OWN inventory, and the measures they take to notify the customers when delivery will be made. The issue of lost packages is cute and interesting, but irrelevant to the topic at hand.

I disagree. You are arguing that it is deceptive – I fail to see why it is deceptive to tell a customer that the package will be shipped and it wasn’t because of backorder is deceptive, but it’s not deceptive to say you’ll receive it in a certain amount of time without listing the other exceptions I mentioned. You’re making that distinction of the company being in control – why, exactly? Something is deceptive or it isn’t.

If you say the company is to blame for not having the product in stock and you don’t like that, I absolutely agree with you, that’s fine. You are free to take your business elsewhere. That simply has nothing to do with what this particular representative told you or the fact that they do give out timeframes without a dozen disclaimers.

Absolutely. I would have chosen to follow up in a couple of days, to see if the part was on its way. And if it wasn’t, I would have chosen to locate an alternate source, if possible. Heck, I would have tried to rent, borrow or buy a new laptop, if absolutely necessary.

Following up with additional calls costs the company money. For most customers, this is unnecessary and many will complain about the hassle (the perception of service, which I’ve mentioned). I understand why you’re upset, but I also understand why the company made the decision. They wanted to please the bulk of their customers most at the smallest expense.

Quite frankly, if it was a career-breaking move to wait for the part, I probably would have checked on it myself. However I do agree that notification of the backorder would have been nice – or having some kind of online system where you could check on the status of the order. I encourage you to seek out and do business with such companies.

I understand that you’re concerned about saving time and money, but this is no justification for deceiving the customer.

I don’t really think it was intended as a deception.

I do agree that it is nice and indeed helpful to have notification of backorders. I absolutely think this adds to the service experience. I just don’t think you’re being fair to either of the representatives you talked to. They simply can’t go into every possible outcome. I don’t think these people were wrong for following the policy, and I don’t think the policy is wrong. I do think that an apology and some empathy were much needed.

[JThunder]

fluiddruid, I think you’re clearly missing the point.

YES, there are circumstances that are beyond the company’s control – lost packages, delays due to weather, and so forth. If the company promised delivery on a certain day, and yet circumstances happen which are beyond their control, then that is perfectly reasonable and understandable. I have stated this several times already, and so I’m disappointed that you keep bringing that up.

We are NOT talking about any such circumstances. We are talking about a company’s own inventory – something which they should have control over. That is an entirely different matter. A company should NOT promise delivery by a certain date, if they haven’t even bothered to check if a given part is in stock. And if they lack that ability, then they should avoid promising firm delivery dates until they do find out .

Remember, fluiddruid, these are not just frivolous toys we’re dealing with. These are all-important business machines, the type of devices that businesses and individuals thrive on for their daily activities. Given their all-important nature, it is extremely unethical for a vendor to refuse to notify its customers of any substantial delays in the delivery of these items. It’s like failing to notify a physician that the medical supplies which he ordered are not available. Admittedly, this might not be disastrous, but there is a very good chance that it will be.

And for that reason, a computer vendor needs to deal ethically with its customers, and to notify them of any unexpected problems. If the delivery of a computer is going to be delayed, then the customer can search for alternatives in the meantime. He won’t be left up a creek without the proverbial paddle. The vendor will have performed its role admirably.

YES, it is deceptive for a company to say that a part will be shipped on October 3rd, 2004, if that company has not bothered to verify that that part is available. It might not be intentional deception, but it is deception nonetheless. You don’t promise something if you haven’t exercised due diligence, barring circumstances that are beyond your control.

You keep emphasizing that the company can save money by declining to give notifications, and so forth. Sorry, but that’s not good enough. If they can’t afford to give notifications, that’s fine – but then, they shouldn’t make promises either. Moreover, how much repeat business can this company honestly expect, if they treat their customers that way?

And if the vendor has to give its customer false assurances in order to stay in business – or if they will not notify the customers of outrageous problems as they occur – then they shouldn’t be in that business at all.

You say that by operating in this manner, they can keep most of their customers happy. Even if that’s true, that’s simply not good enough. You have to be honest with the customer. You have to give the customer realistic expectations. You don’t lead the customer to believe that everything is copacetic, if this has yet to be determined. It’s just that simple.

There is nothing difficult about saying “We will send the package out on Friday, if we have it in stock” or “We will let you know when the part becomes available.” Heck, at the very least, the company should notify the customer if they discover that the part needs to be back-ordered. And if they can’t do those things, then they shouldn’t be making any promises.
And I swear, you mention that bullshit about how hurricanes happen, packages are stolen, etc. one more time, I am going to scream.

Look, it’s obvious that you’ve received a lot of abuse from customers who were unhappy because of such events. However, I will remind you – for hopefully the last time – that I am not talking about any matters which are beyond the vendor’s control. I am talking about what they should do to give the customer realistic expectations, and what they should do to notify the customer if something does go awry. That is the proper way to do business, pure and simple.

[fluiddruid]

Obviously, jthunder, you are past the point of making this a rational discussion.

If you feel you need to scream when I make a point, but choose to not answer the questions I’ve made regarding that point, I feel the discussion is better ended at this point.

I’m disappointed that we couldn’t come to some sort of better understanding.

[threemae]

@fluiddruid

Obviously, jthunder, you are past the point of making this a rational discussion.

If you feel you need to scream when I make a point, but choose to not answer the questions I’ve made regarding that point, I feel the discussion is better ended at this point.

I’m disappointed that we couldn’t come to some sort of better understanding.

IMHO, he schooled you.

I can’t stand crappy customer service. It would cost too much for a comapany simply to call and say, “Sorry, the part has been backordered; our fault, but we’ll rectify it as soon as possible?” Boo fucking hoo. If they screw up in the first place, they can spend the $2.00 to call and e-mail somone and say that.

Also, my personal guess is that the comapany rhymes with Crapple.

Please, you’ve got to let us know. We’ll be able to make more informed decisions in the future, and this company will lose more than the $2 it would have cost to simply notify you of the backorder in a timely manner like they ought to have done.