Originally Posted by
groundops
NO!
Most small companies don't have thorough corporate policies in place for all eventualities when they start out.
Many large corporates would fail in this case too...
This was an early business contract done for peanuts to get the company started chalked up on a cigarette packet...
And a 30 month late DPR claim is not normal in most people's books - and the liability concerns were certainly not my top priority when analysing current insurances when I joined.
We are, after all, only talking about a 2010 phone and some cheap aftershave!
Just wanted some feedback.
I was considering a miserly payment to pax. FT has persuaded me to argue for a slighty less miserly payment on their behalf!
Your sense of service recovery expectations, given your demanding views on corporate policies covering A-Z, almost makes me want to tell the pax to just shut up and go away though, I must say...
If you accept the form as it is as being valid (thus ignoring the missing company signature), you can't at the same time say that the claim is late.
On the other hand, if you reject the form (which might be hard having stated publicly that you can guess which former employee completed the form), then I'd say 30 months is out of date.
DanishFlyer