Hyundai’s ‘good save’ shows winning mindset

It SHOULD never be about the messup. Companies, or rather the people who work for them, make mistakes, often: it’s human, and it’s inevitable, and no-one should expect them to get everything right all the time.

But here’s what we should expect of companies – that they take responsibility for the problem; apologise and fix it as quickly and efficiently as possible.

A mistake presents a dual opportunity for companies with a winning mindset: to learn from the negative experience and make the necessary changes to minimise the chance of the same mistake being repeated, and to see it as a marketing exercise.

A good “save” impresses the hell out of a customer and the cost of making good translates into priceless PR.

So it was hugely gratifying to me when I got a call from Hyundai’s communications exec last week, telling me that as a result of my column on the brand new vehicle which a dealership’s driver had “written off” in a crash, the manufacturer would be sending a bulletin to all dealerships on the issue of how to respond if a customer’s car is damaged while in the dealership’s possession.

The owner of that Hyundai Tuscon collected his new replacement vehicle last Wednesday, by the way, and is absolutely thrilled.

“I could see they took special care to get all the extras installed perfectly,” he said. “I really appreciate it.”

Fairness aside, the Consumer Protection Act compels companies to exercise the degree of “care, diligence and skill” that could “reasonably be expected of a person responsible for managing any property belonging to another person” when they have a customer’s property in their possession,

And if they fail to do so, they are liable for any loss which arises from that failure.

Whether or not the consumer or the company has insurance to cover such a scenario, is irrelevant – the company is liable if they were not careful or diligent enough.

I said as much to another company this month – Glasfit.

In October, Ritesh Hariram took his BMW X1 to the company’s Cresta outlet to have its windscreen repaired as an insurance claim.

When he and his wife, Marilyn, arrived to collect it later, they were told their car keys had been given to a driver named George.

Neither George nor the car have been seen since – at least not by the Harirams. The couple was told that the outlet had received a call asking if the BMW X1 was ready and saying a driver would collect it.

“Nobody called to check with my husband or I whether we had arranged or authorised a driver to collect the vehicle on our behalf,” Marilyn said.

“There is no camera footage and, interestingly, ‘George’ signed the checkout form apparently aware that there was no excess to be paid.”

The couple was left to put in an insurance claim, and, at their insistence, Glasfit Cresta paid for the couple’s hired car for some six weeks, until their claim was processed and they had bought a replacement vehicle.

Marilyn e-mailed Glasfit with regard to their other losses – including items which were in the car, such as CDs, cricket equipment and roof racks, which their insurance policy did not cover; the balance of the motor plan on the stolen car, the cost of replacing their garage lock and remotes, and compensation for the leave they were forced to take as a result of the theft of the vehicle – but have had no response.

That’s apart from the loss of the car itself, of course; a loss borne mainly by the Harirams’ insurer.

“I do not in any way want to interfere with my insurer’s right of recovery from Glasfit,” Marilyn said.

Given that Hariram had made no mention of a driver being authorised to collect the vehicle, and the dealership did not call him to verify “George’s” story, it would certainly appear that the branch did not “exercise the degree of care, diligence and skill” that could “reasonably be expected of a person responsible for managing any property belonging to another person”.

Responding, Glasfit’s head of Gauteng retail Byron Sabbioni said: “We can confirm that the Harirams’ claim regarding their alleged further damages has been forwarded to our insurance company, and the matter is being investigated.

“Unfortunately we are contractually bound by the terms of our insurance policy not to comment on the matter at this stage, as the investigation, as well as the claim, has not yet been finalised.”

“We can, however, assure you, as well as the Harirams, that the matter is receiving the necessary attention. As always, we are committed to excellent customer service and satisfaction.”

Marilyn sent that e-mail, detailing the couple’s losses, on November 23 – almost three months ago.

So for now the company refuses to comment on how the keys to the Harirams’ BMW had come to be given to an unknown third party without first checking with the couple, expressed any regret or outlined any steps taken to avoid a repeat occurrence. To be continued . . . Meanwhile, the lessons to be learnt from this case, so far, are:

● Always remove your valuables when you entrust your car to a company for the performance of a service; and

● Write on the form: “Nobody but myself is authorised to collect the vehicle”.

CONTACT WENDY: E-mail: Twitter: