[manjith_pm]

Originally Posted by Dr.Suraj

Wow. Way to go man! The Taj Hotels that paid for the education of every child and full current salary of the employee for the rest of his life - of all employees that died in 26/11 should also be boycotted because some guy in some dealership in India of Tata Motors did something nasty.
Amazing. That a company that does close to 60% CSR since almost a century should be completely boycotted because of something that has happened and just because they didn't respond on Twitter (they may have already responded in person, or still taking time to investigate things). Awesome.
At this rate we should have completely stopped buying Skoda and a few other dealerships of car companies where similar videos of dealer ship employer branding customers have been put up in the past.

With all due respect to their efforts, it’s we the customers who give them the moolah to pursue their CSR spend. Hats off to their efforts in rehablitation efforts or the way they have helped touch millions of lives through employment or otherwise.

But for a company with such noble ideals, it’s their duty to make sure their dealers uphold the very same value system. This is not done in any place. A customer was denied a colour and misreporting that the car had already started. Also why is the gentleman from the showroom reacting so much if there was nothing wrong. In most cases of such showdowns it’s better to also dictate your side of the story, whereas here they trying to prevent any such action. Had a customer tried to cause inconvenience wouldn’t the dealer to move him out of the property and take legal action.

I would not like to talk about Skoda, I’m sure enough people are wary of their After Sales and Sales.

All told Customer is King. When we expect PR to be prompt in all other cases of customer support, why not in this case.
If this were the case from a client of theirs on their Software Consulting side, you think their would be such a delay?

P.S. I said “I Vow” which is singular in nature.

[invidious]

Originally Posted by Dr.Suraj

Wow. This is serious trouble! Not at all good at such a time. Time and again, just as TML finally makes good products, bad PR hits them in the solar plexus. Classic case being the Nano fires. No one ever forgot that.


Wow. Way to go man! The Taj Hotels that paid for the education of every child and full current salary of the employee for the rest of his life - of all employees that died in 26/11 should also be boycotted because some guy in some dealership in India of Tata Motors did something nasty.
Amazing. That a company that does close to 60% CSR since almost a century should be completely boycotted because of something that has happened and just because they didn't respond on Twitter (they may have already responded in person, or still taking time to investigate things). Awesome.
At this rate we should have completely stopped buying Skoda and a few other dealerships of car companies where similar videos of dealer ship employer branding customers have been put up in the past.

A lot of the Tata stuff is PR to prop up their image. I know of a case where a very senior person in the Group was accused of sexual harassment and it was brushed under the carpet. However, it was conveniently brought up again during the corporate fight to replace the CEO to score brownie points. And lest we forget Tata group built its fortune on opium trade as well. I am not saying they aren't nation builders - they are. But let's not look at issues through rose tinted lenses.

[Dry Ice]

Seems like dealer has claimed a privacy strike on this guy's channel. Here is he describing the events since the video went live.


Not a word yet from TATA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bImFBvVhwI

[Screwdriva]

Whatever the customer's faults, no dealership has any right to behave in that manner. I'd be surprised in Tata Motors allowed this dealerships existence to continue damaging its brand.

[V.Narayan]

I am a citizen who is a part of the pre-Twitter pre-YouTube pre-WhatsApp generation. With these 'light fire to a haystack' social media modes it is assumed that everything being put out by the accuser is the whole truth and only the truth and inflamed responses are triggered off without hearing the other side. Sure something has obviously happened. A peeved customer is at the gate. The employees in true desi style have not shown good sense neither has the maker of the first video. We need to know what the other side have to say; what conversation or written communication took place before this video saga; what mistakes or foul behavior did these two brothers display before things got to this point. Without facts do not judge. All parents of children know that the first of two kids who comes crying and complaining is often both victim and perpetrator.

Dear brother BHPians forgive me but most of our responses are too full of indignation and volcanic anger without knowing what the other side has to say. Maybe after we hear the other side we can be justified that indeed Tata's are rogues and everyone from RNT downwards must hang but when we start screaming based on only one version and that too inflamed by not one but 3 videos in short order then it makes me wonder what under currents are flowing.

[Biraj]

Irrespective of who is right or wrong, I will expect Tata to do better in terms of training and sensitising their dealers/staff. For a simple fact that the dealership represents a brand that I care about or am interested in. The YouTuber was unknown to me before this video and I don't think I will be much interested in his activities going forward as well.

Tata or for that matter any other brand needs to realise that times are changing. Millennials will show/express their dissatisfaction/frustration in different ways. Making a video about their experience comes naturally to many of them. Such a segment is more likely to go to YouTube or Facebook live with their experience than us, who will most likely talk or send an email. The dealership staff needs to be sensitised on how to deal with such situations. Being rigid or dismissive will only do damage to their brand.

[Sophomore]

From the guy's YouTube channel what I have understood is that the matter got settled within themselves.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x4mnsWwDf5A

[Hayek]

Interesting conclusion. Clearly there was fault on both sides here. The customer had no right whatsoever to record live video within the dealer’s premises and refused requests to stop recording. One of the dealer employees clearly overreacted and made a mess of things - even though you can see other employees trying to calm him down and to politely request the customer to stop recording. The conclusion suggests that the dealer had some basis to press charges - which is why the customer has backed off; and likewise the customer had basis to press charges - causing the dealer to back off.

Am surprised at how we turn one dumb sales person’s behaviour into an indictment of an entire company (Tata Motors) or even a business group like the Tatas. Unfortunately, the nature of social media is that it turns us into members of a lynch mob - looking at very grey real life situations through black and white lenses. All’s well that ends well.

[manjubp]

Originally Posted by Hayek

Am surprised at how we turn one dumb sales person’s behaviour into an indictment of an entire company (Tata Motors) or even a business group like the Tatas. Unfortunately, the nature of social media is that it turns us into members of a lynch mob - looking at very grey real life situations through black and white lenses. All’s well that ends well.

Can't agree more, seeing a trend that BHPians are overreacting to an individual person's behaviour. Yes there is high need to stand for customer rights, at the same time we should be able to distinguish between individual's behaviour and an organisation/company's policy. Of course it is responsibility of the organisation to train the individuals and recognise/punish them based on their individuals. Having said that we are dealing with humans who have emotions, specifically we Indians and Mr Trump are high on that, and expect sometimes to take ugly turn of event.

Team-BHP contents has much more influence on the BHPian community and public, I think it is time for BHPIans to be cautious and be more realistic, rather than responding with very generalised statements like, I am not going to buy or black list this or that.

[gkveda]

I am just wondering, if the dealership had prohibitions to take the videos, then how did they allow the person to take the video on the day of delivery? Prohibition is applicable for all the days and for everyone if it was real prohibition

Also, I have seen many people taking the videos of car delivery in multiple dealership. There is nothing wrong. So, there is NO prohibition of video shoots inside the showrooms.

I am really surprised, why the staff behaved so weirdly when some "customer" is taking video. In fact, if they had behaved in professional way by saying "No Orange color" and grey OR white were the options/alternatives, then probably there was no need for the video to be uploaded as well. This happens in most dealerships due to some mistakes.

[FrodoOfTheShire]

Originally Posted by Hayek

Am surprised at how we turn one dumb sales person’s behaviour into an indictment of an entire company (Tata Motors) or even a business group like the Tatas. Unfortunately, the nature of social media is that it turns us into members of a lynch mob - looking at very grey real life situations through black and white lenses.

Originally Posted by manjubp

Can't agree more, seeing a trend that BHPians are overreacting to an individual person's behaviour.

Agreed to the mob nature of social media and people jumping to conclusions on hearing just one side of the story.

But I'd disagree on the other point. Tata motors or any company as a whole is made up of hundreds/thousands of employees/contractors who represent the company in the eyes of the customer. So they should be mindful of this responsibility while on duty and also fearful of the company's actions should there be any such incidents. It falls on the company to instill that discipline in its employees/contractors, which looks like Tata motors has failed to do, if reports of arrogant behaviour of many dealers, are to be believed.

I was reading the Landmark Jeep incident thread. So one thing is clear, all that the customer wants is quality product/service for their hard earned money. If that's fulfilled, then no customer would want to create unnecessary ruckus. In both cases, if respective companies/dealerships had strived for customer satisfaction, then these threads wouldn't be there!

Originally Posted by gkveda

I am just wondering, if the dealership had prohibitions to take the videos, then how did they allow the person to take the video on the day of delivery? Prohibition is applicable for all the days and for everyone if it was real prohibition

This "prohibition" talk is complete nonsense. Forget about showroom, nowadays dealers allow Youtubers to shoot videos in stockyards which is usually off limits even for the paying customers!

[honeybee]

Originally Posted by rovingeye

Tata Motors Delhi showroom (Malwa) manhandling customer.

https://Youtu.be/M9WQijS7Uvk

He was asking for trouble. I would say oversmart.

So the entire video only shows one thing: The potential customer started streaming live from the dealership, without regard to the privacy of the staff or any other customers who might be around.

Coming to his original complaint, there's not a word about what the dealer offered - if orange car was not available, did the dealer offer him a full refund, why did the customer agree for a grey car, did the customer use the existing channels to report his grievances (such as the Tata customer care number)? It's a completely one sided story.

Now coming to the behaviour of the staff: If someone thrust his phone in my face and claimed to be streaming my actions and words live, without my permission, I would tell that person to **ck off, seriously. There is reason to believe this guy had walked into the showroom, talked to the guys, and upon not getting what he wanted, probably told them he would be doing a live streaming of their responses, and then he started the recording outside and then walked in to catch their reaction.

I am wholeheartedly with the showroom staff in this matter. I think they were incited / provoked.

[srishiva]

Originally Posted by gkveda

I am just wondering, if the dealership had prohibitions to take the videos, then how did they allow the person to take the video on the day of delivery? Prohibition is applicable for all the days and for everyone if it was real prohibition

Also, I have seen many people taking the videos of car delivery in multiple dealership. There is nothing wrong. So, there is NO prohibition of video shoots inside the showrooms.

I am really surprised, why the staff behaved so weirdly when some "customer" is taking video. In fact, if they had behaved in professional way by saying "No Orange color" and grey OR white were the options/alternatives, then probably there was no need for the video to be uploaded as well. This happens in most dealerships due to some mistakes.

I think they were upset since they knew why the video was being taken. Not because video was banned or anything.
Whatever the video recording chap was doing, what the showroom did was plain wrong. It shouldn't have reached that point in the first place.

[SoumenD]

As per this Cartoq article, it's resolved now. Hail social media

Linkhttps://www.cartoq.com/tata-motors-i...-incident/amp/

But then I believe the guy was being a bit over-the-top as well. You can't directly ask anyone to come live just like that. Technology has pros as well as cons. One should be wise to understand the difference. Never the less, looks like TATA did step in and the tone of both parties seem to be mellowed down (in the video)

[typlo]

Even if the guy was trespassing, they do not have the right to manhandle, verbally abuse, or touch his property.

They could have called the cops, asked the person to stop filming and cancelled his booking. Trespassing and filming v/s Assault. Guess which side is heavier.

I refuse to believe the sellout speech in the second video and alleged resolution by Tata because it doesn't make sense.