Mike Lyle writes

Janet Baraclough wrote:

If the customer was rational, that would be the simplest solution.
Unfortunately, their behaviour so far suggests they are not rational. In
which case, it could be a very bad idea to appease the manipulative
delusional behaviour .
[...]

Hmm. Agreed on the mental-health principles. But I'm not sure that it's
good business practice to assume a customer is pathologically
delusional before all other possibilties have ben excluded. The rose
does, after all, objectively show a touch of yellowishness, as
mentioned in its description. What Charlie's told us is equally
consistent with obstinate stupidity or gross mick-taking -- both of
which are more common than loopiness. I'd set the boundaries exactly as
you describe, but send back the fiver at the same time "as a goodwill
gesture", and all bases would then be covered. I know the scale is
different, but I imagine that's what Marks and Spencer would do.


I'd be very worried indeed about any goodwill gesture being interpreted
as an 'admission of guilt'. There is some accepted way of wording it so
that the refund is a goodwill gesture 'without prejudice' - if you go
the refund route, take some advice about how to word it.
--
Kay