Ziang's rssNokia
Word of mouth - and how it hurts
25/02/08 23:57
Today's papers featured an interesting
article - writ
of seizure against Nokia Singapore
Nokia forced to cough up more than $1,000 over faulty phone
By Alfred Siew, Technology Correspondent
EARLIER this month, Ms Tan Geok Hoon marched into Nokia's office, brandishing court documents and threatening to seize the assests of the cell-phone giant.
A bailiff stood at the side of the 43-year-old sales manager, ready to reposess the company's things.
Ms Tan was enforcing a small claims court decision that ordered the world's largest cellphone maker to pay her $778 for a faulty cellphone she bought last year.
The moment, which Ms Tan recalled recently, marked the culmination of a seven- month David-versus-Goliath battle.
The story of one woman's fight against a mighty firm made its rounds in several online forums last week, casting the spotlight on how the world's top phone maker handled unhappy customers.
Things all started in August last year, when Ms Tan bought a Nokia E61i phone from a StarHub store.
Ms Tan said the phone would not power on in the first week, but a Nokia service centre refused to exchange it for a new one.
Frustrated after sending it for repairs several times, she turned to the Small Claims Tribunal in November.
At this point, Nokia tried to settle the matter privately, by offering to exchange Ms Tan's phone with a new one, or to refund her $388. This was the purchase price that came with a two-year StarHub subscription.
She rejected the offer, looking instead for $778 - the full retail price of the phone.
Ms Tan told The Straits Times: 'I didn't claim for more than what the phone cost because I'm not greedy for Nokia phones.'
There were two consultations and one hearing before the small claims tribunal. Nokia missed the last two sessions, claiming the relevant department had not received the notice on time.
As a result, the company was ordered on December 18 last year to pay Ms Tan $778 within 15 days.
But it did not.
Said a furious Ms Tan: 'I gave them warning at every turn. I gave them time to respond, but nobody called me or discussed it with me.' So she turned up at Nokia's Alexandra Road office with the court order seeking payment.
This time, the company agreed to pay up, but only if she signed an acknowledgement form that had a clause preventing her from discussing the matter further. She said 'no' and left. When she returned on Feb 11, she had a writ of seizure in hand and had a bailiff to force Nokia to pay up - with no strings attached.
In the end, the cellphone giant coughed up more than $1,000, including bailiff fees and transport charges. Nokia spokesman Foo Wen Dee said this was the first such incident and it regretted the matter was not settled amicably.
She added that the company was investigating why its officers had not resolved the issue earlier.
Ms Tan shared the victory on online forums here, and Nokia drew flak for the way it handled the case. 'I want to let people know that sometimes there's no point talking... if one side doesn't respond, then we have to take action,' she said.
Since the postings appeared in the past week, netizens have asked if more electronics firms should allow exchanges if a product fails shortly after purchase. Some firms do so on a case-by-case basis, while others offer it for certain products like hard disks.
In case you're still wandering, a writ of seizure is the same as demanding the assets of whoever is at stake to be liquified for payment.
A real fine case of consumer power, where the consumer has to be right.
It was a good conversation between a fellow colleague and my boss, and sadly, we agreed that such examples are hard to come by. Most Singaporeans choose to live and let by after a complaint or two, if the company refuse to budge or reply. What's the issue then?
Singaporean companies are living in a naive world.
In this world, there's lots of channels for word of mouth to start and spread. The effects are far reaching, and people do believe them better than reviewers of products by the company. A certain number of companies are still living in the Stone Age - thinking that consumers buy into whatever they are fed with.
I guess these companies deserve it if they got into trouble then. They really ought to google the term, "emancipated consumers".
Consumers nowadays are way smarter than retailers. We know where to source for good deals, and we know how to make ourselves heard. I guess Singapore education must have taught them to follow the rules, and when there's no rules, listen to orders.
Baaah.
Choose to ignore a complaint can lead to huge repercussions - in this case, the Nokia brand is definitely affected. Many consumers will choose to think thrice when buying a Nokia phone. What's the point of opening up so many customer care, spending millions on advertising dollars, differentiating between the "N" and "E" series to cater to different consumer groups, when such a case will wreck it up? Trying to clear up this mess will cause it even more.
I guess the branding managers over at Nokia forgot the idiom - Rome was not built in a day. Now they have to mend up the hole which they wrecked.
2 weeks ago, SPH Singapore committed a similar fault - they published an article which shows the steps to install Mac OS X on a PC. FYI, that's illegal. Members of Apple forums were disgusted by the article, and I was but a few of them who sent in an email to request for an answer.
Of course, the editor did not even bother to reply me. Being a nice guy, I emailed Steve Jobs, and here's the reply:
Dear Mr. XXXX,
Your letter to Mr. Steve Jobs was forwarded to me from Apple's Office of the General Counsel for appropriate handling. Thank you for bringing this to our attention, and for your support of Apple.
Best regards,
Apple Inc.
Associate General Counsel
Kevin Saul
Of course, the best outcome of it would be an apology from the editor, in the Straits Times, if Apple were really to follow up.
Let's just wait and see. Maybe Apple is another example of company who choose to ignore views from consumers. Then again, they replied to me, didn't they?
Nokia forced to cough up more than $1,000 over faulty phone
By Alfred Siew, Technology Correspondent
EARLIER this month, Ms Tan Geok Hoon marched into Nokia's office, brandishing court documents and threatening to seize the assests of the cell-phone giant.
A bailiff stood at the side of the 43-year-old sales manager, ready to reposess the company's things.
Ms Tan was enforcing a small claims court decision that ordered the world's largest cellphone maker to pay her $778 for a faulty cellphone she bought last year.
The moment, which Ms Tan recalled recently, marked the culmination of a seven- month David-versus-Goliath battle.
The story of one woman's fight against a mighty firm made its rounds in several online forums last week, casting the spotlight on how the world's top phone maker handled unhappy customers.
Things all started in August last year, when Ms Tan bought a Nokia E61i phone from a StarHub store.
Ms Tan said the phone would not power on in the first week, but a Nokia service centre refused to exchange it for a new one.
Frustrated after sending it for repairs several times, she turned to the Small Claims Tribunal in November.
At this point, Nokia tried to settle the matter privately, by offering to exchange Ms Tan's phone with a new one, or to refund her $388. This was the purchase price that came with a two-year StarHub subscription.
She rejected the offer, looking instead for $778 - the full retail price of the phone.
Ms Tan told The Straits Times: 'I didn't claim for more than what the phone cost because I'm not greedy for Nokia phones.'
There were two consultations and one hearing before the small claims tribunal. Nokia missed the last two sessions, claiming the relevant department had not received the notice on time.
As a result, the company was ordered on December 18 last year to pay Ms Tan $778 within 15 days.
But it did not.
Said a furious Ms Tan: 'I gave them warning at every turn. I gave them time to respond, but nobody called me or discussed it with me.' So she turned up at Nokia's Alexandra Road office with the court order seeking payment.
This time, the company agreed to pay up, but only if she signed an acknowledgement form that had a clause preventing her from discussing the matter further. She said 'no' and left. When she returned on Feb 11, she had a writ of seizure in hand and had a bailiff to force Nokia to pay up - with no strings attached.
In the end, the cellphone giant coughed up more than $1,000, including bailiff fees and transport charges. Nokia spokesman Foo Wen Dee said this was the first such incident and it regretted the matter was not settled amicably.
She added that the company was investigating why its officers had not resolved the issue earlier.
Ms Tan shared the victory on online forums here, and Nokia drew flak for the way it handled the case. 'I want to let people know that sometimes there's no point talking... if one side doesn't respond, then we have to take action,' she said.
Since the postings appeared in the past week, netizens have asked if more electronics firms should allow exchanges if a product fails shortly after purchase. Some firms do so on a case-by-case basis, while others offer it for certain products like hard disks.
In case you're still wandering, a writ of seizure is the same as demanding the assets of whoever is at stake to be liquified for payment.
A real fine case of consumer power, where the consumer has to be right.
It was a good conversation between a fellow colleague and my boss, and sadly, we agreed that such examples are hard to come by. Most Singaporeans choose to live and let by after a complaint or two, if the company refuse to budge or reply. What's the issue then?
Singaporean companies are living in a naive world.
In this world, there's lots of channels for word of mouth to start and spread. The effects are far reaching, and people do believe them better than reviewers of products by the company. A certain number of companies are still living in the Stone Age - thinking that consumers buy into whatever they are fed with.
I guess these companies deserve it if they got into trouble then. They really ought to google the term, "emancipated consumers".
Consumers nowadays are way smarter than retailers. We know where to source for good deals, and we know how to make ourselves heard. I guess Singapore education must have taught them to follow the rules, and when there's no rules, listen to orders.
Baaah.
Choose to ignore a complaint can lead to huge repercussions - in this case, the Nokia brand is definitely affected. Many consumers will choose to think thrice when buying a Nokia phone. What's the point of opening up so many customer care, spending millions on advertising dollars, differentiating between the "N" and "E" series to cater to different consumer groups, when such a case will wreck it up? Trying to clear up this mess will cause it even more.
I guess the branding managers over at Nokia forgot the idiom - Rome was not built in a day. Now they have to mend up the hole which they wrecked.
2 weeks ago, SPH Singapore committed a similar fault - they published an article which shows the steps to install Mac OS X on a PC. FYI, that's illegal. Members of Apple forums were disgusted by the article, and I was but a few of them who sent in an email to request for an answer.
Of course, the editor did not even bother to reply me. Being a nice guy, I emailed Steve Jobs, and here's the reply:
Dear Mr. XXXX,
Your letter to Mr. Steve Jobs was forwarded to me from Apple's Office of the General Counsel for appropriate handling. Thank you for bringing this to our attention, and for your support of Apple.
Best regards,
Apple Inc.
Associate General Counsel
Kevin Saul
Of course, the best outcome of it would be an apology from the editor, in the Straits Times, if Apple were really to follow up.
Let's just wait and see. Maybe Apple is another example of company who choose to ignore views from consumers. Then again, they replied to me, didn't they?
|