Question:

The so called Good Will Gesture' versus compensation - which would you prefer?

by  |  earlier

0 LIKES UnLike

Recently I had a lawyer quantify the difference between what is termed in business as the 'good will gesture' and compensation.

Apparently the difference is that the'good will gesture' is not an admittance of liability and compensation is.

But isn't that the whole problem - that not enough companies, especially big corporations that should know better, don't have properly structured systems in place for accepting responsibility when their products/services don't meet with customer approval.

I have come across some companies that actually LIST what they will pay out in the event of faults occuring - one I remember, was Thames Water.

The lawyer I'd spoken with, pointed out that water is a necessity and that having a pre-arranged compensation structure in place for when things go awry for that type of business is more appropriate than say British Telecom, which I'm currently having to do battle with.

Is anyone else suffering from the absolute complete incompetence of BT?

 Tags:

   Report

1 ANSWERS


  1. I prefer compensation. More in the long term. Thats why companies dont like it. The good will gesture is great for the short term but thats about it.

Question Stats

Latest activity: earlier.
This question has 1 answers.

BECOME A GUIDE

Share your knowledge and help people by answering questions.
Unanswered Questions