This customer service just baffles me.
Why not just pay their cleaning bill and be done with it, instead of trying to deal with court and lose/ban the customer and all their future business?
Why not just pay their cleaning bill and be done with it, instead of trying to deal with court and lose/ban the customer and all their future business?
Why the OP did not decide to switch out of Uber after this incident also baffles me, but to each their own. Crazy how people will let a multi-billion dollar corporation do anything to them and will keep giving them money.
How is this not a perfect example of the "customer voting with their wallet"? Maybe its not the vote you or I would have made. Clearly the customer values continued access to the network more than buying new clothes once. That is a vote for Uber's shitty [;P] business practices.
Also, free advertising and reputational damage!
I've literally never used Uber because of stuff like this, and I discourage others from using them also. I mostly drive myself, but I'm content to use regular taxis and occasionally Lyft.
The customer service team's priority is maximizing customer satisfication.
The legal team's priority is minimizing legal liability.
If that were literally true Uber wouldn't currently exist. They were knowingly breaking laws and arguably continue to do so.
Uber's lawyers are interested in advocating for Uber, period. In most organizations the legal department can and will be overridden when it's in the company's financial interests. Saying that something is non-negotiable is the oldest negotiating tactic in the book. If Uber refuses to bargain over a settlement it's because (a) you're not bargaining hard enough or (b) they're prepared to go to court. You can never know without forcing the issue.
The Anglo-American legal system, and to a lesser extent most other legal systems, principally evolved to adjudicate disputes among aristocrats and merchants. Neither group is shy about advocating for themselves. If they want the maximum benefit of the law, neither should regular individuals be shy.
It's a function of priority: make money > minimize legal liability > satisfy customers.
That was from the business strategy and distribution folks. And then legal does the best they can with what they have.
Point being.... Don't be surprised by unoptimal actions if they are local optimums for the people involved. Thus the overreaching contract for $100 incident.
Work in a small town sometime and realize the respect you get - people take advantage of your company out of vengeance more than anything else - which is why most people here would be happy to exploit any justification to lower their cable bill.