customer wants compensation

[suzy walker]

Hi All

Hope you can offer some advice please. Been in business a while now, and haven't had this situation before. Customer wanted 3 flowergirl dresses ASAP in a cornflower blue. Sent swatch. Made dresses. Sent ASAP. She didn't order through the website (god knows why) and sent measurements via e-mail.. (our fault) we got mixed up with her measurements and dresses did not fit. Offered her a refund, arranged to collect dresses, offered 3 sashes in cornflower blue (as she's now buying ivory dresses from debenhams) - so the colour ties in.

I also offered to remake them, but she said the quality was not good and sent loads of photo's. I agree with her somewhat, but as by this time she's losing control saying I've ruined the wedding, nothing now matches, etc etc. I thought it was best just to refund - as did she.

She now wants compensating for buying new dresses, stress, petrol to buy new dresses, the cake not matching, etc etc.

Any thoughts?

Thank you very much, Suzy

 

[jackal999]

Several, but sadly non broadcastable on here.

I would just laugh at her to be honest.

J

 

[Michael Thompson]

f you do decide to offer any recompense, offer it unconditionally and without quibbling. It is also advisable to take any appropriate follow-up action, such as a letter of apology or a phone call to make sure that the problem has been fully resolved.

 

[suzy walker]

citizens advice have told her that we need to compensate her - is this £50, or £500! She just keeps calling and screaming - i feel like I've done everything I can and want to do. get over it, buy some bhs dresses, i'll send free blue sashes. lovely

 

[Charlie B ACS]

Interesting that you "need" to send it. You shouldn't be under any liability to.

 

[jackal999]

Citizens Advice would tell her that, mainly because it's what she wanted to hear but also because she gave them her side and her side only of the story.

You have refunded her and if that's the best you want to do in the circumstances then that's it.

From what you say, SHE decided to cancel, SHE decided to choose something from BHS or Debenhams or wherever, she chose to go there in her car, etc. etc. etc.

From what you say you have offered to remake etc. and taken all reasonable steps to correct the position.

I would do nothing and next time she calls say you will only deal with it in writing so you can both prove what is being stated by each party in case it goes further and also because it removes the physical emotion from the situation.

If she then decides to pursue it then you can deal with it on a point by point basis and make an informed decision on how you then want to proceed.

J

 

[paulears]

worth recording it too for use later to show her irrationality and unwillingness to discuss in a civil manner.

The trouble with weddings is that they are accepted in court as a time limited, high expense occasion. So she may well be sided with in court if it went that far?

 

[suzy walker]

thank you all. much appreciated

 

[roydmoorian]

Perhaps her wedding insurance has already paid out - Offer half a litre of colour matched Dulux for the cake ! Why not ask her when the divorce is ?

But seriously has the wedding already happened or could you start from scratch and get it right this time - or at least make the offer to do so ?

 

[OldWelshGuy]

She HAD to allow you to correct the error. the moment she said 'NO, she lost her right to anything.

tell her to take a hike.

 

[Alan]

Any thoughts?

She is trying it on (pardon the pun)

 

[smallclaimsassistance]

Citizens advice are wrong. She could have gone out and bought matching colour dresses. If you want help writing a robust denial, happy to help.

Dean

 

[The Resolver]

Unless you have binding terms and conditions that denied her consequential damages then she IS entitled to claim damages/losses that would not have been incurred had the dresses been made to the correct measurement. Do you have such T&Cs?

Whether she can prove such damages/losses depends on the extent to which she satisfied her duty to take all reasonable steps in a timely manner to minimise such losses.

If you don't settle this by the 1st October then you will, by new EU law, have to select an Alternative Dispute Resolution provider certified by Trading Standards and give her the contact details. The bad news is that, if instructed, the ADR provider would work on the case at your cost alone as no contribution other than nominal is allowed from the customer, but the 'good' news is that you don't have to participate in such ADR. I put 'good' in quotation marks since to refuse once referred will only increase the risk of the customer damaging your online reputation with a series of adverse reviews and, of course ,of her issuing a claim in the Small Claims Track ('Court') the costs of defending which will not be recoverable by you even if you succeed with your defence.

For those interested in the new law - see my event at http://www.themediationroom.com/#!events/cxd9

If anybody is interested in attending I m happy to extend the early bird rate for UKBF members even though that ends this week.

 

[smallclaimsassistance]

Unless you have binding terms and conditions that denied her consequential damages then she IS entitled to claim damages/losses that would not have been incurred had the dresses been made to the correct measurement.

In principle, agree, but not for what she wants to claim. The refund covered the dress cost. All of the rest is a consequence of the customer's decision to buy ivory, instead of the original blue (except possibly the petrol). A claim for "stress" resulting from this is probably several steps short of a non-starter. In the unlikely event that the OP is the only UK manufacturer/retailer of cornflower blue dresses, failure to give her adequate opportunity to remedy, as she offered, is likely to kill any claim.

 

[Solicitor]

In reply to the OP.

The first thing is, when was/is her wedding? I assume you sent the dresses prior to her wedding and she would have discovered the mistakes as soon as she opened them. I am assuming she did not use the dresses as she has said she is buying replacements in ivory from Debenhams.

To this end, her wedding has not been 'ruined'. She has just been inconvenienced - this is part of life! She could only obtain compensation from you for her damages (what she has had to spend over and above the contract price you offered to her). She cannot claim for emotional/hurt of feelings/stress - but can claim for anything she has had to pay over and above what your dresses cost as long as she is purchasing like for like.

Richard Howlett / Selachii LLP / 020 7792 5649

 

[The Resolver]

In principle, agree, but not for what she wants to claim. The refund covered the dress cost. All of the rest is a consequence of the customer's decision to buy ivory, instead of the original blue (except possibly the petrol).

The problem was not colour but size and quality. These breaches of what she was entitled to expect were agreed by the OP. No argument. We do not know the detail but assuming there was urgency to obtain a replacement in time for the wedding then the purchase of the dresses from Debenhams (whatever the colour) was to satisfy the duty of the customer to mitigate her loss. If, however, there was no urgency eg the dresses take 7 days to make and the wedding was 7 weeks away, then I agree she should have allowed the OP an opportunity to 'get it right', but I do not hear that sense in the thread.

Assuming urgency applied, then she is entitled, assuming also no terms of sale restricting liability, to the difference between the price paid to Debenhams and the price charged by the OP. She is also entitled to claim for any other costs and expenses reasonably incurred only because of having to obtain replacement dresses.

A claim for "stress" resulting from this is probably several steps short of a non-starter.

It depends on whether she can show the stress was sufficiently significant as to amount to a medical condition. Probably not. However as this is likely to come within the informality of the Small Claims Track , I can well see a judge understanding the likelihood of some level of anxiety linked to fears of a ruined wedding so as to add a modest additional amount to the judgment to reflect that head of claim. Most people would see that as fair and as such would, therefore, fit the culture of the SCT, released, as it is, from a more formal legal interpretation and determination.

 

[Leather Briefcase Company]

" she just keeps calling and screaming..."
You must tell her politely and firmly to set out her complaint in writing, and you will then be able to assess the position and take advice how to resolve the issue.
Stay calm and businesslike. Do not be harried or hurried by a customer. Time passing is a definite aid to getting problems into perspective.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Hi All
I also offered to remake them, but she said the quality was not good and sent loads of photo's. I agree with her somewhat, but as by this time she's losing control saying I've ruined the wedding, nothing now matches, etc etc. I thought it was best just to refund - as did she.

She now wants compensating for buying new dresses, stress, petrol to buy new dresses, the cake not matching, etc etc.

Any thoughts?

Thank you very much, Suzy

Now the way I see it is this.

1. There was a mistake made regarding sizes.

2. You offered to correct the mistake.

3. You discussed and both agreed to have a refund as settlement.

4. post fact she decided to make an additional claim.

Now the way I see it is that there was time to correct the original error, the customer refused to accept the correction, so she was put back to the position she was in prior to purchase.

I don't see how she can possibly make a claim because she herself refused the answer which was to remake the dresses (We have to assume there was time, otherwise the OP would not have made the offer) .

 

[smallclaimsassistance]

Hi Graham

The problem was not colour but size and quality.

- not as far as the heads of claim were concerned "I've ruined the wedding, nothing now matches," and "cake not matching". The only heads not related to that are the claim for "stress" (arguable) and petrol. Had she bought identical dresses from elsewhere, after the refund, there would be no claim except for the expense of travelling to get them/p&p.

So as far as the dresses themselves are concerned, she got a refund - that takes care of the dresses (notwithstanding any price discrepancy, I grant you, but I would be surprised if an off the shelf dress from Debenhams cost more than bespoke- if it did, that is a viable head).

That leaves the petrol and "stress" (because the "wedding was ruined") and therefore the claim for compensation mainly hinges on the decision to buy different colour dresses. Incidentally, we have no idea what was involved, but for what it's worth, Google and 30 seconds produced a whole page of cornflower blue bridesmaid dress options. I'm not for one moment suggesting that she should have taken the first option she could find, but it appears there were options, so mitigation in purchasing a different colour may be an issue.

It depends on whether she can show the stress was sufficiently significant as to amount to a medical condition. Probably not. However as this is likely to come within the informality of the Small Claims Track , I can well see a judge understanding the likelihood of some level of anxiety linked to fears of a ruined wedding so as to add a modest additional amount to the judgment to reflect that head of claim. Most people would see that as fair and as such would, therefore, fit the culture of the SCT, released, as it is, from a more formal legal interpretation and determination.

As you say, we don't know the detail, but as the criteria is a diagnosable medical condition, and therefore there has to have been a diagnosis consequent upon this incident or its' aftermath (ie: not just stress), in the absence of a diagnosis, I can't see this washing, even in the SCT. It may well be that there was a medical attendance, but from the tone of this, "by this time she's losing control saying I've ruined the wedding, nothing now matches, etc etc. I thought it was best just to refund - as did she. She now wants compensating for buying new dresses, stress, petrol to buy new dresses, the cake not matching, etc etc.", I don't get that impression.

I agree the SCT is more relaxed towards evidence, but that doesn't change the fact that "stress" claims of this type (assuming no diagnosis) went out with Nicholls v Rushton 23 years ago. I believe a judge would still expect to see medical evidence if an injury is claimed - indeed (as you will know) the MOJ have shored up provisions for expert evidence in the SCT to make up for the lack of legal representation up to a higher level of claim, which is probably the reason why the recoverable fee for expert evidence in the SCT was increased threefold two years ago.

I entirely agree, in principle, that there is a claim, but, I can't see any significant (ie: more than just expenses) claim for the items listed above - for the reasons listed above - getting off the ground.

Cheers

Dean

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Don't you agree that she has also limited the amount by her refusal to accept a correction?

 

[smallclaimsassistance]

Yep, absolutely - see my post above

In the unlikely event that the OP is the only UK manufacturer/retailer of cornflower blue dresses, failure to give her adequate opportunity to remedy, as she offered, is likely to kill any claim.

 

[suzy walker]

Ok, so plot thickens.... I arranged collection of dresses. Measured them, they are correct. One waist measurement was admittedly a tad small, entirely fixable, but still. I thought, we must had got things mixed up with the measurements as per my original post, it was the only conclusion I could come to. But it turns out customer Thought we'd add extra inches on to the measurements she gave. This is beyond odd. We would never do this, we have never seen these people. Not one other customer has ever given us measurements less that what they are! However, the quality of one dress was questionable. Was it the most minor fault I have ever seen? Yes. Would I have dealt with it before sending the dresses had I been in work that day. No. Why? Because it's ridiculously minor. In customers eyes it's a fault, and that's fair enough. I did fully refund her. So why am I brining this up again? She is now slagging us off over the Internet, Facebook etc, and still demanding compensation. Can anyone help please?

 

[MBE1]

Simply reply if you feel you need to that incorrect sizes were supplied, that the dresses were made as per sizes given and a full refund was promptly issued, but as a bespoke dress supplier you make the dress according to the size requested, nothing else.

Hopefully you can show many happy testimonials as well, most people will accept that she is being unreasonable and treat her reviews accordingly.

 

[smallclaimsassistance]

I would drop her a letter saying that if she persists in slagging you off online, you will instruct solicitors to seek damages from her for libel. As far as her claim for compensation is concerned, I would tell her the matter is closed and to put up, or shut up. I didn't think she had much of a case to start with, and after reading this, my view of her prospects has not improved!

 

[OldWelshGuy]

She is now maliciously damaging your business reputation. as stated above turn the tables and tell her if she doesn't stop, you will be issuing proceedings against here for damages to your business.

 

[ganah-allan]

I suddenly have stress after reading the thread. Anyway, the root of the matter is that you may not have a terms and condition statement that fully shield you from clients like this. In my humble opinion, a refund is enough in this regard. Her decision to buy replacement dresses is her own and she is responsible for whatever consequences that may occur in making such decision. You have done your part. You have nothing to do with her petrol or stress. It is her own making because she refused your replacement offer in the first place. If you have done a complete refund already, then sleep on it.

As for her going to social media damaging your reputation, you can always remind her that if she does not stop you will be forced to file libel case and make good with that promise. I would like to see her in jail. Haha!

Keep it cool.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Libel is a civil offence so incarceration isn't an option.

The point here is that she wasn't even ENTITLED to a refund as the product is as ordered other than a tiny fix.

She has got off lightly and STILL is trying it on.

I would go on the attack rather than be of the defence.

 

[jackal999]

If I were you I would go and ask my solicitor to send her a warning letter as above.

Coming from a solicitor will make her think your serious as well as it being from an independent source, so if it came to court you can prove you tried your best.

Wouldn't have thought it would cost much tbh.

 

[Leather Briefcase Company]

I wouldn't expect you to share what your past client has written about you.
But if it is untrue and malicious, you need to stop being defensive.
The customer is not always right, and very silly if they have broadcast damaging untrue allegations in writing.
If you think you have a case, see a solicitor.
Threaten prosecution unless all smears are withdrawn - plus a suitable sum in compensation.