Why the Terms of Service matter

[Abtacha]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

...Hopefully the clerk learned a lesson.

That he should face the potential risk of being fired for ignoring company regulations just because someone told him a story, which the customer might have made up to avoid the fee, over returning a VHS a single day late?

In my opinion the clerk acted absolutely right and someone choosing not to rent there anymore is acting slightly irrational.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

Back in the days when VHS rentals was all the rage I was in a store looking at videos. It was fairly crowded, probably some 30 customers looking around. Then this harried looking man comes in holding a cassette in his hand and apologising loudly for being a day late, and explaining that his 8 year old daughter had an emergency appendectomy. The clerk being just as loud, but also obnoxious said the customer had to pay the late fee (one day rental). The customer got agitated and said something along the line of "didn't you hear what I said, I had to go the hospital and be with her all night and day". The clerk refused to budge. A gentleman standing next to the brouhaha calmly took up his wallet, "allow me to pay he said". The customer looked a bit shocked and didn't even reply. While shaking his head the gentleman handed over the money and said, "please close my account", turned and walked out the store. 20 or so customers just put back their VHS on the shelf and walked out behind him. Hopefully the clerk learned a lesson.

On the other hand I suppose a lot of people lie about reasons for being late and I as a customer actually think you shoud apply the rules to all people. I mean the cost is not high at all for being late one day so why just not pay.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Abtacha

That he should face the potential risk of being fired for ignoring company regulations just because someone told him a story, which the customer might have made up to avoid the fee, over returning a VHS a single day late?

In my opinion the clerk acted absolutely right and someone choosing not to rent there anymore is acting slightly irrational.

It seems to me that the most that might have happened to the clerk if he'd accepted the excuse is that he'd be required to make up the late fee himself.

But the whole episode seems a bit crazy--why didn't the customer just quietly pay the presumably negligible late fee instead of trying to get out of it? I suspect that it might have been the clerk's obnoxiousness, not the insistence on payment, that was the real problem the other customers reacted to.

[khalleron]

Originally Posted by Catlady

It seems to me that the most that might have happened to the clerk if he'd accepted the excuse is that he'd be required to make up the late fee himself.

But the whole episode seems a bit crazy--why didn't the customer just quietly pay the presumably negligible late fee instead of trying to get out of it? I suspect that it might have been the clerk's obnoxiousness, not the insistence on payment, that was the real problem the other customers reacted to.

Yes, I was thinking that. One does not raise one's voice to the customers, ESPECIALLY when the store is full.

One says, 'Sir, let me check with my manager.'

If the manager is the owner, he/she then waives the late fee. If he/she is not, then the blame is placed on corporate headquarters.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

Back in the days when VHS rentals was all the rage I was in a store looking at videos. It was fairly crowded, probably some 30 customers looking around. Then this harried looking man comes in holding a cassette in his hand and apologising loudly for being a day late, and explaining that his 8 year old daughter had an emergency appendectomy. The clerk being just as loud, but also obnoxious said the customer had to pay the late fee (one day rental). The customer got agitated and said something along the line of "didn't you hear what I said, I had to go the hospital and be with her all night and day". The clerk refused to budge. A gentleman standing next to the brouhaha calmly took up his wallet, "allow me to pay he said". The customer looked a bit shocked and didn't even reply. While shaking his head the gentleman handed over the money and said, "please close my account", turned and walked out the store. 20 or so customers just put back their VHS on the shelf and walked out behind him. Hopefully the clerk learned a lesson.

Just as a thought experiment, now recast that entire episode with the guy returning the video late as a liar, who is trying to hurt the video store's business out of malice, and see if it tastes as good.

(I'll bet you had no knowledge beyond what you witnessed at the time of what really happened.)

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Catlady

It seems to me that the most that might have happened to the clerk if he'd accepted the excuse is that he'd be required to make up the late fee himself.

Actually, that would be illegal in the US. In some states, arguably criminal (not paying for the hours worked). He could, however, simply be fired for nor following company policy.

Originally Posted by Catlady

But the whole episode seems a bit crazy--why didn't the customer just quietly pay the presumably negligible late fee instead of trying to get out of it? I suspect that it might have been the clerk's obnoxiousness, not the insistence on payment, that was the real problem the other customers reacted to.

Possibly the clerk knew the guy from many, many previous late returns, for which he always had an excuse, but was smart enough to not just call the guy a liar in public. We don't (and can't) know.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by khalleron

Yes, I was thinking that. One does not raise one's voice to the customers, ESPECIALLY when the store is full.

The customer is always right, except when he's wrong. It happens. Last time I actually raised my voice to a customer was to a guy who literally looked me in the eye and told me the reason we didn't have the color of paint he wanted was that our employees were mentally retarded. I shouted him the whole length of the store to throw him out, and came >< this close to calling the cops when he refused to leave. (And I will treasure forever the look on his face when he realized I wasn't bluffing, and that if he didn't leave, he was going to jail.)

The clerk, however, doesn't get paid enoug to deal with that kind of crap. That's the manager's job. I suspect the manager might have been the real problem (unless the clerk was the manager, again, we don't know).

There really isn't a situation that can be described in one or two paragraphs that you can definitively say who was right and who was wrong.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by taustin

There really isn't a situation that can be described in one or two paragraphs that you can definitively say who was right and who was wrong.

The clerk was wrong. If you are dealing with customers, your responsibility is to de-escalate the situation, not engage in a shouting match. Period. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be dealing with customers.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Catlady

The clerk was wrong. If you are dealing with customers, your responsibility is to de-escalate the situation, not engage in a shouting match. Period. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be dealing with customers.

I've worked in retail for about 30 years, nearly all of it at management level and above. And while what you say is generally true, it isn't universally so. And you do not know that the clerk was wrong, you assume that because the original poster made it sound that way. But when the customer is in the wrong, the customer is in the wrong, and if the customer is disruptive to the business, or worse, abusive to the customer, the manager's responsiblity - that is legal responsiblity - is to protect his employees and business from the abusive behavior and disruption (in that order). To do otherwise is to invite lawsuits, both against the company and the manger personally. A business is required to maintain a non-hostile work environment.

(There's no evidence that the incident in question was of that nature, because, as I said, it's impossible to know form the brief description. But as a universal truth, you're simply wrong, and wrong in ways that can get a manger in to a lot of trouble.)

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by taustin

I've worked in retail for about 30 years, nearly all of it at management level and above. And while what you say is generally true, it isn't universally so. And you do not know that the clerk was wrong, you assume that because the original poster made it sound that way. But when the customer is in the wrong, the customer is in the wrong, and if the customer is disruptive to the business, or worse, abusive to the customer, the manager's responsiblity - that is legal responsiblity - is to protect his employees and business from the abusive behavior and disruption (in that order). To do otherwise is to invite lawsuits, both against the company and the manger personally. A business is required to maintain a non-hostile work environment.

(There's no evidence that the incident in question was of that nature, because, as I said, it's impossible to know form the brief description. But as a universal truth, you're simply wrong, and wrong in ways that can get a manger in to a lot of trouble.)

There was no manager in the anecdote. There was a loud and upset customer, and there was an obnoxious clerk. So your emphasis on management is interesting but irrelevant to the situation described.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Catlady

There was no manager in the anecdote. There was a loud and upset customer, and there was an obnoxious clerk. So your emphasis on management is interesting but irrelevant to the situation described.

Can you point to something specific in the original account to say the clerk was not, in fact, the manager on duty? The store manager, perhaps not, if he was young, but retail is pretty well known for having kids under 25 in assorted management positions.

(And frankly, I would have been suspicious under the circumstances presented. Somebody who has spent the night in an ER with a sick child would not typically be insistent of a favor. Typical behavior there is to lament the reason why they're late, hoping, perhaps, but not expective, the fee be waived. Making a scene is the behavior of someone who is more concerned with the fee than the sick child, which is to say, someone trying to pull a fast one. And the described reaction of the crowd was not typical, either. When I've had a customer make a scene over money they don't have coming to them, the most typical reaction from other customers is for the next one in line to come up and - loudly - ask, "What's his problem?" The whole thing reason more like a revenge fantasy from someone who tried to weasel out of a late fee, and got called out on it, and wished it had played out that way.)

But, again, there just isn't enough information in the original account to judge. You and I (and the person who offered it, I suspect) cannot possibly know if this was someone who tried to weasel out of late fees on a regular basis. There are no absolutes when it comes to dealing with people.

[Kumabjorn]

It was in the days of renting VHS, so not exactly yesterday. The clerk was young, most likely a student doing extra work (University town), sincerely doubt he was the manager. This store is part of a franchise chain.

I did not expect this kind of reaction. To me it was more a story about about the consequences of sticking to a TOS, that I had almost forgotten, but the discussion here brought it to the front of my mind, and that is why I posted it here. It happened something like 15 or 16 years ago, stores didn't have computerized cashiers, so there would have been no consequence for the clerk just accepting the cassette. The customer, as far as I recall didn't ask for the late fee to be waivered, he just offered an explanation for why he was late (a rather typical Swedish trait).

[odiakkoh]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

The customer, as far as I recall didn't ask for the late fee to be waivered, he just offered an explanation for why he was late (a rather typical Swedish trait).

Then there was no reason for the "didn't you hear me..." part. Just explain and pay.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

It was in the days of renting VHS, so not exactly yesterday. The clerk was young, most likely a student doing extra work (University town), sincerely doubt he was the manager. This store is part of a franchise chain.

I've had manager trainees who were under 21. The only reason I'v never seen one under 18 is that the insurance companies won't approve giving keys and alarm codes to minors (or, rather, won't sell a company insurance for the same rates if you do). He may well have been a student, working part time, and still a manager, and if he's a manager of any kind, even a trainee, there is almost certainly a time every week where he's the only manager on duty.

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

I did not expect this kind of reaction. To me it was more a story about about the consequences of sticking to a TOS, that I had almost forgotten, but the discussion here brought it to the front of my mind, and that is why I posted it here. It happened something like 15 or 16 years ago, stores didn't have computerized cashiers, so there would have been no consequence for the clerk just accepting the cassette. The customer, as far as I recall didn't ask for the late fee to be waivered, he just offered an explanation for why he was late (a rather typical Swedish trait).

According to your account, the customer got loud first (and immediately), then, in your words, "got agitated" and questioned the late fee. That is asking for it to be waived. Had I been the manager in charge, that kind of behavior is a real warning sign that the customer is trying to pull a fast one of some kind. (However, if this was Sweden, which you imply, the cultural differences may account for the different perceptions. Certainly customer service standards are quite different in Europe, from what I've read in trade rags.)

[QuantumIguana]

It's generally true that if you jump out of an airplane in flight without a parachute, you will die. It's not universally true, of course, people have fallen from airplanes without a parachute and lived, but it is rare.