Case: Customer Complaints

A large retailer in home furnishings has put into place a four-stage procedure for handling complaints. First, the customer gets “a very cordial hearing.” but every effort is made to put off the complaint. (Perhaps the customer did not follow the instructions that came with the product, for example.) If the customer persists, he is advised to apply for compensation directly from the manufacturer, according to the warranty. If the customer insists in getting help from the retailer, he is asked to come in with his paperwork and to fill out certain forms, which are filed away with no action taken.

If the customer presses the complaint at this stage, he is offered a minimal adjustment. This amount is never greater than the company’s profit. The company does not attempt to judge the actual merits of the case.

If the customer now threatens legal action, a supervisor will actually examine the case and offer the customer what he would likely win in court.

If that offer fails, the legal counselor for the company is asked for advice.

The company claims that this procedure is justified because many claims are unnecessary, resulting from misuse of products, failure to read directions, or fraud.

1. Whose responsibility is it to respond to customer complaints? The retailer? The manufacturer?
   
2. Do you agree with the company’s rationale that those with real complaints will pursue them until they receive just compensation?
   
3. Is the company acting ethically in determining that examining every complaint is just too expensive?
   
4. Is the complaint procedure fair?
   
5. Does the procedure discriminate among customers?
   
6. Would you consider your activity to be moral if you handled the first two stages of the complaint procedure in this customer relations department? Would you take this job?
   
7. What ethical theories are being called into play in this case?

(adapted from Difficult Moral Questions by Germain Grisez, 1997)

Last | Ethics Contents | Next