FedEx canceled their money back guarantee

[Lakewood90712]

My uninformed opinion is a partial refund would be fair, even though they intended to provide overnight if weather had not delayed. If it got there the second day, they should charge for the lesser service that was actually provided, not overnight $

 

[soupcxan]

That would be good if I had the time to mess with them.

Really, it takes ~5 minutes to dispute these days. Log into your credit card website, find the charge, click dispute, type why. Done.

 

[samclem]

No, they never do that, the shareholders wouldn't approve of it, and the shareholders are definitely more important than the passengers in the flying cattle truck. and they would probably have to take the plane empty from Montgomery to ATL.

If the problem is equipment failure, you get a coupon for a rotten airport meal (and hopefully the vendor is actually open late night in a small airport). If it is an "act of God", then nothing, it's not their fault. This delay was mid-flight, but for most delays, I understand the pilot doesn't get paid, the steward/stewardess don't get paid till they board the flight.

The airlines do provide surface transportation sometimes--I've been on late night buses with other "happy" passengers on two occasions. And if a delay is their fault (e.g. equipment problem or crew availability) and you have to stay overnight mid-trip, they do buy you a room and a meal or two. It won't be a very nice room.

 

[ziggy29]

My uninformed opinion is a partial refund would be fair, even though they intended to provide overnight if weather had not delayed. If it got there the second day, they should charge for the lesser service that was actually provided, not overnight $

That assumes their systems are set up to allow such a partial refund. It's not likely they are, IMO. And if it required special paperwork and approval from the higher-ups, you are much better off as a business just allowing the clerk to give a full refund.

 

[Lakewood90712]

That assumes their systems are set up to allow such a partial refund. It's not likely they are, IMO. And if it required special paperwork and approval from the higher-ups, you are much better off as a business just allowing the clerk to give a full refund.

I am almost positive it's like you describe about not being set up for partial refunds, including paperwork, and getting approvals etc.

 

[bUU]

regardless of any "guarantee" or fine print in the T&Cs that may or may not exist.

This is the part that doesn't make sense to me. It is akin to saying that consumers can buy anything they want and then unilaterally impose their own expectations on the transaction. I don't see how that jives with any reasonable set of standards, regulations or legal constructs.

Do go ahead and dispute the charge though if you feel strongly about it. It truly only takes 5 minutes to initiate the dispute and if you relish the idea that it will punish the vendor via the cost of having to process the dispute then that's fine. And my experience is that many companies will write off such disputes once or twice with each consumer, just in the interest of customer retention.

The only downside is that this sort of thing tends to drive companies to make even more restriction terms and conditions in the future to try to box these unrecoverable costs out. It is chilling when you compare the way customer service has changed within any specific retailer or service provider over a period of a few decades. The progression of a certain class of changes can pretty easily be tracked back to specific classes of consumer interactions that the company aims to box out. But that's a long-term concern.

 

[Hermit]

This is the part that doesn't make sense to me. It is akin to saying that consumers can buy anything they want and then unilaterally impose their own expectations on the transaction. I don't see how that jives with any reasonable set of standards, regulations or legal constructs.

Do go ahead and dispute the charge though if you feel strongly about it. It truly only takes 5 minutes to initiate the dispute and if you relish the idea that it will punish the vendor via the cost of having to process the dispute then that's fine. And my experience is that many companies will write off such disputes once or twice with each consumer, just in the interest of customer retention.

The only downside is that this sort of thing tends to drive companies to make even more restriction terms and conditions in the future to try to box these unrecoverable costs out. It is chilling when you compare the way customer service has changed within any specific retailer or service provider over a period of a few decades. The progression of a certain class of changes can pretty easily be tracked back to specific classes of consumer interactions that the company aims to box out. But that's a long-term concern.

As the OP, the performance wasn't that bad. As I stated before, although maybe not so clearly, the major problem was the attitude. I looked at the status of the delivery about 5 hours after it was to be delivered which was the evening of the next day. At that point, they knew what the weather was for the night. The delivery time status was unknown. The only thing I could ascertain from that lack of status was that they had an excuse to no longer be bound by their guarantee and could care less about when my letter was delivered. Had they updated the status and said they would deliver it 24 hours late, which is when it was delivered, I would have been OK. I think they just no longer cared. For $44.47 I think they should have taken the time to update the status on a letter with that high a priority. The difference between one day and two day delivery was less than $10. I did get value for my money and, by-the-way, it got there in the time needed.

 

[soupcxan]

This is the part that doesn't make sense to me. It is akin to saying that consumers can buy anything they want and then unilaterally impose their own expectations on the transaction. I don't see how that jives with any reasonable set of standards, regulations or legal constructs.

What? The service is advertised and sold as overnight. The service delivered was not overnight. Burying something in the fine print that says "not really overnight" is irrelevant.

 

[bUU]

What? The service is advertised and sold as overnight.

With terms and conditions attached.

Burying something in the fine print that says "not really overnight" is irrelevant.

Not even a little.

 

[Lakewood90712]

I have an account at UPS , even though I rarely am the shipper, UPS sends out an E-Mail blast whenever major weather delays are likely. I assume FED EX does the same, but that doesn't help the typical retail customer . Seems like they should notify a shipper if a major weather delay alert is active.

 

[ziggy29]

I have an account at UPS , even though I rarely am the shipper, UPS sends out an E-Mail blast whenever major weather delays are likely. I assume FED EX does the same, but that doesn't help the typical retail customer . Seems like they should notify a shipper if a major weather delay alert is active.

Yes, major shippers (i.e. their "whale" customers) will get this level of service, but occasional, casual shippers at the retail counter will not.