The mother writes:

Wanted to update you that I received a call from Bryan Merryman, Chief Operating Officer. He was apologetic, compassionate and understanding and I appreciate his call. What he did make clear and what is no doubt a challenge for him, is that this is a franchise and as such is responsible for their own policies. He made it clear that the way this franchise handled this situation is at odds with corporate. Still no word back from the owner/manager of the franchise since she hung up on me, which is disappointing because her actions are hurting other franchises who have nothing to do with this. As an apologetic gesture, Mr. Merriman offered to send some product that I refused as again, my only desire in this is that this franchise and manager adopt a more compassionate policy in the future. We'll definitely be giving the movie theater, who graciously let us use the restroom, our business in the future but I can't say the same about this Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory franchise. The owner/manager may think that her decision was the most sensible business-based decision, but in the end, business is about people.

In a story in the Orange County Register, the franchise owner claims she apologized to the mother, but the mother says that never happened, and she still hasn't heard from the franchise owner since she was hung up on.

(Photo: Getty)

On Wednesday, Kieffe & Sons posted a statement on their website, apologizing to "all who were offended." As commenters pointed out, saying you're sorry that someone got offended is not the same as actually apologizing for what you said. Now, according to the Bakersfield Californian, we find out even the non-apology wasn't genuine.

“I don’t regret the sentiment at all,” said Kieffe, who bought the 48-year-old dealership from his father in 1974. “It’s what we believe.”

. . .

The dealer’s Web site Thursday bore a statement about the ad that included an apology “to all who were offended.” Kieffe said he’d been contacted by Ford Motor Co. after the manufacturer heard complaints from numerous “blog-lo-dites.” The company asked him to post something saying he was sorry if he’d offended anyone, Kieffe said.

Kieffe said he will continue using J.W. Horne for the dealer's ads. Horne also confirmed that he wrote the trolling, single-entry blog that went up on Thursday.

Ford Says "Shut Up" Ad Was a Mistake, But Dealer Stands Behind It [Bakersfield Californian]
PREVIOUSLY: California Ford Dealership Radio Ad Tells Non-Christians To "Sit Down And Shut Up"
(Photo: Amy Watts)

According to the Bakersfield Californian, Rick Kieffe, the dealership owner, said he doesn't remember approving the ad (emphasis added):

“It’s just something that went by us,” said Kieffe, who does not attend church but considers himself “a Christian spirit.” “We’re obviously sorry that it offends a given segment who identifies themselves as atheist.

Kieffe said he received a flood of angry phone calls from people around the world who saw blog posts about the story. Kieffe's advertiser, or someone claiming to be him, apparently didn't get the memo, as he has posted an unapologetic screed conflating gay marriage with the purchase of a Japanese car (seriously).

PREVIOUSLY: California Ford Dealership Radio Ad Tells Christians to "Sit Down and Shut Up"
Car Dealer Regrets Ads Telling Non-Christians to "Sit Down and Shut Up" [Bakersfield Californian]
(Photo: Amy Watts)

Hi, I just read your article about Hollywood Video's policies and most of it is flat out not true.  It sounds like whoever wrote in initially has a particularly evil district manager who is instituting his own policies.

1. Store level employees covering at other stores: This is pretty much retail chain standard, especially in chains with a small number of employees per store.  Hollywood video will reimburse mileage, you just need to fill out a form.  As far as write ups for refusing, must just be that district, it's not policy.  

2. As far as the quotas go, yes and no.  At hire all employees are told that offering these things are "must see behaviors".  They can, and will, fire you for not offering.  There are quotas for Playguard percentage (somewhere in the range of 1.5% for employees, and 5% total for the store, off the top of my head), though employees can't be fired simply for failing to meet the number.  (You can't /make/ people buy stuff)  Store Managers /can/ be fired if their store fails to meet the target two periods in a row.  

3. There is no policy that prevents employees from telling people the money from Playguard does not go to charity.  I will admit it is pretty shady to just stop donating the money however.  

4. Employees can't remove late fees?  Weird, I did it this morning. This may be a policy local to a district if it was getting out of hand.  My best guess anyway.  

5. After 12 days the late fee does go to a separate screen, this has been true for a long time.  It's not to frustrate and confuse people however, and employees see both screens when an account gets pulled up, so if a customer is confused it's solely the fault of an incompetent employee.  The reason for the two screens is that after twelve days, only the store manager (or assistant) can remove or alter the late fee (IE you better have a good reason for being so late).  

6. Receipts don't print for cash transactions that only have rentals or concessions on them.  This is just to save paper.  An employee can print one if it's asked for.  

7. The EW thing never went away, they just stopped requiring employees to push it.  They're actively promoting it again. There's no "silence is acceptance" however, and we need to scan your credit card (an additional time) to activate the offer.

The conditions described by the previous tipster must be local, because I don't deal with anything like it.  I'd advise he go over his DM and talk to someone at corporate.

RELATED
"Is Hollywood Video Bringing Back "Silence Is Acceptance" Magazine Subscriptions?"
(Photo: Sister72)

After another battle with a branch manager today—who insisted that money couldn't be returned and that I needed to fill out a fraud report—I went over her head.  After a heated, uh, discussion, the main downtown Seattle branch put the $1,500 back in my business checking account.  The $7 fee was refunded a few hours later.
 
Some bad PR in Consumerist no doubt helped. Thank you!

We're not sure we posted the story in time to have an effect on the outcome, but we'll take it.

RELATED
"WaMu Presents Random $1500 Check On Someone Else's Account, Then Calls It Fraud"

"The aim is to get in touch with our customers because they are more than just numbers," said Doug Betts, vice president and chief customer officer for Chrysler, which means he's in charge of ensuring quality.

"When a person is happy with his or her car, they tend to tell five other people,” Betts said. “But when they’re unhappy, they tell 50 people — friends, relatives, neighbors and fellow workers. A positive experience obviously sells more cars. An unpleasant experience doesn't. If a person we call has a problem, it's up to us to make it right."

Sure, it's a stunt—but in a week they're opening up a short-lived line of communication with 2,100 customers instead of hiding behind dealerships and call centers.

We're curious to see how this turns out, so if anyone receives a call from a Chrysler executive in the coming days, please let us know how the call goes.

"Chrysler Execs Phone Your Home" [Kicking Tires]
(Photo: Getty Images)

Dear Ian:

On behalf of Comcast I would like to apologize for the $1.99 fee being assessed to your account. This fee is assessed when you make changes to your account, like changing the level of services you receive, but it is not for changing marketing preferences. This should not have happened, and we've reviewed your account to verify that the marketing profile has been updated properly and the credit has been applied to your account. Per my voicemail, we have laced an additional credit on your account for the trouble that you experienced.

We've also coached the representative who processed the change to your account and are taking steps to make sure this process is clear to all of our representatives, so this doesn't happen again.

We'd like to thank you for sharing this feedback with us and thank you for being a valued Comcast customer!

Sincerely,
Frank Eliason

[Frank] explained that the charge on my bill was the result of someone's mistake rather than Comcast policy and credited me for a month of service.

I work for Comcast and I think I know what is going on with the $1.99 charge to stop sending junk mail.

In some markets (mostly the old AT&T Broadband ones), there are small fees for making a change to your account that is processed in the back office and don't require a technician to go to the customer's home. Such changes include things like:

- Upgrading or downgrading digital cable service from one tier to another.
- Upgrading or downgrading the speed of a customer's high speed internet service.
- Adding or removing calling features on Comcast Digital Voice.

Some markets make these changes for free; others charge a small fee for this (the decision is made by the local market, not by Philadelphia, so complaints to people in the market and the local franchise authority may help). The largest fee that I am aware of is $5.

Here's where the junk mail part comes in: in those old AT&T Broadband markets, we control things like stopping junk mail, stopping bill inserts, etc. by adding a line item to the customer's bill. It doesn't charge the customer anything, it just notifies us that the customer doesn't want junk mail.

However, to add this line item to the customer's bill, the representative is required to enter a change of service order, just as if the customer had requested an actual change in the services they want from us. So this is really a matter of Hanlon's Razor, not deliberate company policy.

The best way to avoid this charge in the first place is to bundle a request to stop junk mail with another change of service. Requesting no junk mail at the time you get your service installed is one good way. The alternative is to call in after the charge has "posted" to your account and ask for it to be reversed, like your submitter did.

As I don't work in public relations, I'd appreciate it if you could keep my name and position out of this. I'm in the sometimes uncomfortable position of seeing a lot about how the system works but not having the power or authority to do anything to change it, other than advocating for more customer friendly policies with my superiors (which I try to do on a routine basis).