Would a company be liable to uphold its promises if a rogue human customer service agent promised something ridiculous such as 1 million dollars worth of free flights?
hopefully
Air Canada Has to Honor a Refund Policy Its Chatbot Made Up
151–158 of 158 posts
Re: Air Canada Has to Honor a Refund Policy Its Chatbot Made Up
#152Here's the real punchline: > Experts told the Vancouver Sun that Air Canada may have succeeded in avoiding liability in Moffatt's case if its chatbot had warned customers that the information that the chatbot provided may not be accurate. Here's a glimpse into our Kafka-esque AI-powered future: every corporate lawyer is now making sure any customer service request will be gated by a chatbot containing a disclaimer li…
IANAL, but AFAIK you can't disclaim liability that you actually have. I'd love to hear an actual lawyer who knows (not a know-it-all amateur) declaim on this, but: A Ferris Wheel operator cannot make you sign a disclaimer that they're not responsible if it collapses and kills you. Or rather, they can, but it will not hold up in court. Similarly, you can say in your manual, "We're not responsible for anything we say h…
Personal anecdote: A few years back I left my car at a dealership for some warranty work that was going to take a few days. It has a soft top and they left it in their gated lot overnight, where it got broken into (slashed the top, ripped open the glove box, stole a cheap machete I got from a white elephant exchange). They claimed that they weren't liable at all since I signed a waiver and should go through my own insurance. After a little push back, they caved and covered it under their insurance like they should have from the beginning. I don't go to that dealership for anything anymore, for that and other reasons.
Re: Air Canada Has to Honor a Refund Policy Its Chatbot Made Up
#153The real desire here is to get it to promise a lifetime of free service. edit: arguing that the chatbot is a separate legal entity is a wild claim. It would imply to me that air canada could sue the ai company for damages if it makes bad promises; not that air canada is excused from paying the customer.
> promise a lifetime of free service. That might be too wishful thinking. The tribunal would take into account damages, and whether it was reasonable to believe that you're entitled to free service. In this case, the chatbot promised a ~$800 discount, and the tribunal awarded ~$800. But I doubt they'd make the same decision again, or deem the lifetime service enforceable/un-cancellable.
I think it's within the bounds of reason if you can cite emotional damages to grant pretty much any recourse. It maybe won't fly if you're clearly trying to trick the AI, but I think there will be general plausible deniability.
It may feel weird, but it's utterly insane to delegate customer interactions to an agent that has nobody's interest in mind, not even their own, whom you cannot trust to abide by policy.
Similarly, if the bot negotiated any sort of special deal, I think it would be very, very difficult to argue that it lacked apparent authority to make deals or that it's not a fair consideration.
Re: Air Canada Has to Honor a Refund Policy Its Chatbot Made Up
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US at least once that notification that "the call may be recorded for quality assurance " happens, both parties have been notified and you're good to record regardless of the state you are in. What do you use for recording your calls?
Is that actually true? I always thought that was one of those internet sayings that had no basis in law, ie one party, two party protections etc...
It is. There's good information linked here.
Re: Air Canada Has to Honor a Refund Policy Its Chatbot Made Up
#155Sometimes the courts get it right
Re: Air Canada Has to Honor a Refund Policy Its Chatbot Made Up
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that is such a perfect way to avoid getting sued, why don't they put that on every page of their website and train all of their customer service staff to say that when they talk to customers?
I used to work for a company that sold factory automation technology, and had hundreds of manuals for all the products they sold. In the front matter of every manual was a disclaimer that nothing in the manual was warranted to be true. This was automation equipment running things like steel mills, factories, petroleum plants, where failures could result in many deaths and grave financial losses.
I could see that for paper manuals or normal pdfs since once they leave the premises of the company anyone could alter the pages of the manual.
Re: Air Canada Has to Honor a Refund Policy Its Chatbot Made Up
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are probably not wrong, however take note that this is exactly the line of thinking that led to the DMCA. Beware the law of unintended consequences. To misquote you. "I bet if we removed the requirement to get a lawyer and file a lawsuit that those behaviors would vanish real quick, if all you had to do as the wronged copyright holder was report to an authority(the hosting service) that Company X is infringing on…
It also led to things like easy small claims court, consumer protection agencies and DPOs which protect consumers against corporations here in Europe without them having to shell out thousands of euros for lawyers and court cases.
Do all the upsides outweigh all the downsides, such as DMCA?
Re: Air Canada Has to Honor a Refund Policy Its Chatbot Made Up
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
Forget about digital experiences for a moment. Forget entirely about chatbots. > Air Canada argues it cannot be held liable for information provided by one of its agents, servants, or representatives That includes EMPLOYEES. So they tried to argue that their employees can lie to your face to get you to buy a ticket under false pretense and then refuse to honor the promised terms? That's absolutely fucked.
> They tried to argue that their employees can lie to your face to get you to buy a ticket under false pretense and then refuse to honor the promised terms. That's fucked. Pretty standard behavior for big companies. Airlines and telcos are the utter worst ... you have agent A on the phone on Monday, who promises X to be done by Wednesday. Thursday, you call again, get agent B, who says he doesn't see anything, not ev…
I had a problem with Verizon FIOS that went on for more than half a year, where they'd charge me for a service I wasn't signed up for, then I'd call in to complain and demand a refund, then they'd refund me and apologize profusely and swear up and down that they had fixed the problem for sure and that it would definitely not happen again, then it would of course happen again the next month, rinse&repeat.
Finally I filed an FCC consumer complaint which then forces a written response from the company within 30 days. I got a call a few days later from someone at Verizon's "Executive Relations" who fixed it immediately. It was such a frustrating dance, but the real trick is that when this happens don't mess around with a hostile company. Just go directly to the regulator agency they're required to answer to.