Claims Case Studies

Formatting:

1. Identify the issue

What are the main problems at hand? Is there more than one issue with the claim? Who’s at fault - client/ 3rd party vendor/ in-house? 

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

Did they miss their show due to the claim? Is there a chance we will lose the client as a customer due to the issue? 

3. Problem Solving

What can be done to rectify the situation? Is there more than one possible solution to the claim? 

4. Potential Solution

Did we follow the standard claims procedure - if not, why? Was the claim a little more complicated? How did we deal with this

5. Evaluate the result 

What result did we come to in the end and why? Was the client satisfied with the outcome? 

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how? 

What could we have done on our end/ what could the client have done on their end to avoid this claim? 

Example Claims to reference - Standard Resolution 

62599-C01

1. Identify the issue

Client’s hard case buckles broke after first use

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

This is not a major issue, it does not impact the clients show or the overall set-up of their display, it is a simple inconvenience. May need urgent replacements if they are planning to check their bag as luggage after the event. 

3. Problem Solving

Asked production to send out replacement as a courtesy → always double check with production before confirming with the client in case of stock issues.

4. Potential Solution

Production approved, and we shipped client out replacements. 

10015541-C01

1. Identify the issue

Client claims there was pixelation and color tint on their backdrop graphic. In this case the client was at fault as this was visible in the artwork they uploaded and approved. 

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

Client disappointed with the outcome of the graphic → we did not lose the customer though as a future order was placed

3. Problem Solving

If the order was vended from ES or XP, always get the QC images for a comparison. We received the QC images, and reviewed the proofs → we confirmed that this was present on the proofs and was printed exactly as was approved. 

4. Potential Solution

The standard claims procedure in this case was followed. We denied it, but we do offer a 20% graphic reprint code. This claim was denied as the pixelation was mentioned in the proofs, but was still approved and put into production.

5. Evaluate the result

Client was not overly satisfied, but it seems as though they did accept that they were at fault. Client placed an order for a graphic reprint, with new artwork to avoid the issue with pixelation & color tint

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how? 

Claim could have been avoided if the client initially uploaded artwork without pixelation or uploading revised files after the initial proofs were sent that point out the issue. 

65294-C01 

1. Identify the issue

Client received their order, but it was different from the proof they had approved. This was our fault → the designer uploaded the incorrect artwork files to the vendor, hence the incorrect artwork was printed. 

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

Client still had time, so their show was not missed. This was the client's first order with us, so we want to resolve it as soon as possible to keep them as a customer. 

3. Problem Solving

As this was on us, we have to reprint. The designer sent over updated proofs with the correct artwork to the client for approval, and the order was reprinted correctly. 

4. Potential Solution

This is the standard procedure for such a claim. This was also straight-forward as the client did have more time. However, if this issue were to happy and the client did not have anymore time, the claim would have to be escalated

5. Evaluate the result

The end result was to reprint and send out a replacement graphic. Client was happy with the solution and thanked us for the quick fix. 

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how?

The situation could be avoided by taking more care when uploading files to the vendors, and always ensuring we are double checking it to ensure they are correct. 

64230-C01

1. Identify the issue

Client had uploaded artwork multiple times, and had approved the most recent proof sent. After receiving the order, they came back and said we sent the wrong graphic but it was a match to the proof that was approved and the most recently uploaded art file. For this reason the claim was denied

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

Unsure of the impact as the client never responded to the information provided by the support team. They would have had a usable graphic for their event but it was not the version they wanted. 

3. Problem Solving

The fault was to the client, however, we still want to keep them as a customer for future orders → offered a 30% reprint code if they wanted to reprint to help cover the costs as we want the client to be happy with their final product.

4. Potential Solution

This is the standard claims procedure and we followed the correct protocol. It is unfortunate for the client, but we have to stand by our terms of service. This is standard for any denied artwork claims for proprietary orders. We understand graphics are costly and want to help with a discount even though we are not at fault. 

5. Evaluate the result

Unsure if the client was satisfied with the outcome as they did not respond to any emails. There are no additional orders under their account, meaning the client did not place a reprint order. 

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how?

In this case everything was done correctly in-house. The client would have needed to review and read the proofing emails prior to approving in order to avoid the claim. 

64911-C01

1. Identify the issue

This was a vending issue and we shipped out an order to the incorrect address → These situations need to be worked on fast and resolved early as it will often involve two separate clients/orders. Client B (#10013297) called in and said they received an order that was not theirs - we had vended Client A’s order to Client B. 

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

This is a serious claim → what if Client A has an upcoming show and we cannot reroute in time? If Client A were to miss their show due to our mess-up, this would be a potential loss of customer

3. Problem Solving

First step is to reach out to Client A → confirm their address, as well as the absolute latest date they could receive the package. Is it an option to ship directly to their event? Second, we need to check with Client B on their address and time frame so we can organize a shipping label with UPs or FedEx and have the package picked up & rerouted to Client A

4. Potential Solution

This is the standard process of this situation, however, it all depends on the scenario of the situation. In this case, Client A never got back to us, so we proceeded as is based on their in-hand date. We were lucky that this package was delivered early, and that client B reached out, as we had time to fix this. 

5. Evaluate the result

In the end, we got this package collected and reshipped from Client B to Client A. Client A did not suspect anything because it still arrived before their in-hand date. They must have also not noticed on their tracking number that it was shipped to a different address → this is the best case scenario for this claim

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how?

To avoid this claim, it’s important that there is more caution taken when inputting addresses to our vendors 

10016148-C01 

1. Identify the issue

This claim was a color claim. Both the graphics team, and the client were responsible for this fault. 

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

The main impact this had to our client was that their brand colors did not match the printed fabric. Potential loss of client → may not trust our print facilities in future

3. Problem Solving

This claim was initially denied as the low opacity of the client's artwork was mentioned in the proof, and subsequently approved. 

4. Potential Solution

As per our policy, we denied this claim and offered a reprint discount but they would have to provide new artwork to ensure this does not happen again. Client then called in & spoke with support and mentioned a chargeback on the order. This claim was then escalated and Bobby stepped in and denied again. Client then spoke with Bobby on the phone and further expressed their disappointment. After further escalation, and review of the situation, we offered the client a reprint → this is not our standard procedure, however, we realized that we needed to change our policy as sometimes the notes section is not read. 

5. Evaluate the result

As a result, we offered to reprint this artwork for the client, provided we receive new artwork as per the notes initially mentioned. Happy client → potential return of customer

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how?

This claim could have been avoided if the client read the notes section of the proofs. However, we realized that most clients will miss these notes so we decided to update our policy. Instead of sending the proof with the notes, we are now going to send it as a “waiting for artwork” email to ensure they have read & understood the issue. Going forward, this should help us to avoid claims such as this one in future and ensure clients are happier with their fabric. 

Example Claims to reference - Complicated

64036-C01

1. Identify the issue

Client had ordered a new backdrop and intended it to match the backdrop they had ordered 2 years previous. Pantone was requested for newer order but not previous one so we could not ensure a match - this should have been mentioned by designer

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

Clients backdrop colors did not match one another & they had intended for them to be used side-by-side

3. Problem Solving

We offered x2 solutions 

• Reprint both orders at the same time and cover 50% of the costs
• Redesign a new banner, completely on us, to complement the previous artwork, but not match it

4. Potential Solution

Reprinting both orders at the same time, with the 50% discount would have been the standard procedure with this. Client kept fighting back and was unimpressed with both proposed solutions. 

5. Evaluate the result

In the end, we offered to reprint the newer graphic, and got production to do a pantone match to get these as close as possible in color. This was the best option to keep the client happy and save the relationship. 

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how?

This could have been avoided if it were mentioned at the beginning that orders placed 2 years apart are very hard to match - especially when there’s only a pantone requested for x1 of them. 

10014878-C01

1. Identify the issue

Customer had a couple of issues with this order → Hard Case arrived with multiple scuffs and scratches, there was a tear on one of their backdrop panels, the panel seemed to have extensive stretching, causing their logo to warp

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

The logo appeared warped although everything was inside the safe zone → this is the nature of the 3D snap up display, but there was nowhere that indicated this on the site/proofs

3. Problem Solving

The tear was visible in the QC pics, so we offered to reprint this. Client fought back & requested a full refund. We said we could take back the frame as graphics are non-refundable. 

4. Potential Solution

Client kept on fighting back and this escalated to Bobby. After discussing with NAD, full refund was offered upon return of the graphics and the frame. This was not standard procedure as custom graphics are non-refundable. However, it was the best option to save the relationship with the client as they did have a few previous orders with us 

5. Evaluate the result

The client was only partially satisfied with the result - they did like the display but was concerned that it looked too far off the render on the website

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how?

Claim could've been avoided if NAD did not ship out graphics with the tear. Additionally, if there was more information about the nature of the display and it’s warping on the template. 

66485-C01 

1. Identify the issue

This was an in-house mistake. The graphics department vended the incorrect artwork to the incorrect order number causing the orders to get mixed up and shipped to the wrong clients. 

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

The client had this order shipped directly to their event, so the issue was not discovered until the day of their show. Their show only lasted 3 days

3. Problem Solving

We reprinted and shipped a new graphic at our rush facility, however, it only arrived on the last day of their event, and they were unable to set up. 

4. Potential Solution

As compensation, we offered 30% graphic reprint code, as they had mentioned possibly needing new graphics in future, as well as 20% refund on the entire order. Client agreed to this offer, however, they then fought back and requested a 50% refund. 

5. Evaluate the result

This was escalated and Bobby stepped in and reiterated that we could not offer a 50% refund → the 20% refund had already been processed. Furthermore, we had also offered the 30% graphic reprint discount. Client did not respond to this email, but they did not seem to be satisfied with the outcome - potential lost customer

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how?

This claim could have been avoided if more attention was taken during the vending stage and double-checking that the correct art was being uploaded to the correct order 

10015440-C01

1. Identify the issue

This claim was the fault of WS. They shipped out x3 Silver Step banners and each banner had uneven cuts on the sides of the graphic, leaving the finished graphic looking unprofessional. 

2. Understand the impact of the claim to the client

This was a return client so we wanted to ensure we got this issue promptly fixed for them. 

3. Problem Solving

We reached out to WS and facilitated with them and the client that the client would ship the banners back to the WS warehouse for a replacement. 

4. Potential Solution

Client shipped them back and WS said they would replace and ship back out. This is the standard procedure for such an issue, however, when WS sent the banners back to client for the second time, client reached out again and was very frustrated because banners looked the same - jagged/uneven edges. Client requested a full refund.

5. Evaluate the result

We coordinated a refund with WS as we wanted to save the relationship with the client. Usually, custom graphics are non-refundable, but this was a recurring issue on WS end and the client no longer wanted the banners. Client was satisfied with the refund

6. Could the claim have been avoided? If so, how?

Claim could be avoided - WS take more care in cutting the graphics on the sides of their banners. This was not the first claim that reported this issue.