Author: Shep
Date: 06:02:59 08/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 25, 1999 at 07:22:11, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On August 24, 1999 at 08:42:15, Shep wrote: > >>Again: you don't seem to follow jurisdiction. The producer has to prove that any >>complained behaviour of his product is not due to a product fault. > >in germany it is vice versa. No, it isn't. The so-called "burden of proof" has been reversed in recent legislation (not for criminal cases, mind you :). I will see if I can find a URL reference for you. >>>do you work in this field? >>>i do. and i can tell you in the companies i have worked before the customers get >>>the broken thing back and the producer tells them: it is repaired. >> >>I do work in this field, and I tell you: if I treated my customers this way, my >>employer would soon go bankrupt. A bad reputation can kill you quicker than the >>eye can see in any business where you provide a service. > >you have lived to long in US i guess. Never have. :) >it is different in other countries. Not in Germany, I can guarantee you. Don't confuse things: just because contempt for the customer is a common thing does not mean an individual company bears no damage from a bad reputation. _Especially_ in Germany where people complain about everything. :) >>Hmm, wasn't it a US car company that was recently fined BILLIONS of dollars >>because of product faults...? > >as is said, there are some fools countries all over the world. Agreed. US jurisdiction is a little crazy. But it shows you where the need for customer respect is leading to. You wouldn't want to see this happen in Germany as well, do you? >>>in germany they do beta-tests with trains and the customers are the >>>cats and dogs they do the pet-testing with. >> >>Seems you're taking the "Everybody else is doing it..." escape. > >exactly. Sad. :( --- Shep
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.