Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
Because I both run my own software business and work part-time for a large company in a role which partially involves supporting the internal systems we write. In both these roles, my experience is that the customer will swear to you on their mother's grave that they didn't do a thing - "it just broke", honest. In the overwhelming majority of cases they are wrong - they DID do something, but either don't know that they did, or don't want to admit to the fact.
20-odd years experience of that makes me highly cynical of claims that "it just broke".
Given the choice of believing the judgement of a highly-skilled professional whose job it is to assess and judge the cause of a problem, and an customer who knows virtually nothing about it, I'll trust the judgement of the professional in every case. That may be wrong on occasions, sure, but you can bet it's going to be right in the vast majority of cases.
Sorry, but that's the truth of it.
|
I'm surprised to see you say this Harry because I've been reading a lot of your posts and tend to agree with you on most things.
I've also worked for many years in the past servicing computers including warranty repairs and believe me I'm used to customers lying to me. Most just don't tell you the whole story because it's not in their best interest to. I don't automatically assume that someone posting in this forum is lying though. I don't see what possible benefit it is to them to lie to us, we're not making the decision on the warranty claim.
I've worked with many other professionals in the industry and most I trust and respect but not all (a very few I trust less then the customers). In this case I don't think it matters though because I believe the determination of the cause of the problem has been taken away from the service professional. I believe it's a company policy that broken glass equals accidental breakage != warranty. The technician determines the glass is broken, job done.
The customer is the one who has spent a month with the product and knows how he treated the device. If he can't recall anything that he's done that could explain it I don't think for one minute he should just accept that policy. I suspect the corporate policy is designed to weed out the people that know what they did and they fully expect people with legitimate concerns to escalate.