27 March 2024: Voilà sends me an email about the day’s delivery, with fine print about bags that includes the concluding statement: “Bag charges reflect actual number of bags accepted at delivery.”
27 March 2024: I point out that I did not “accept” four bags that they nonetheless charged me for: “Please refund the difference and ensure your drivers are made aware of the importance of complying with your own legal fine print.”
2 April 2024: Voilà sends me an email about the day’s delivery where the fine print about bags does not include the concluding statement about bag charges reflecting bags “accepted” by the customer.
One possible explanation is that this is not a change but rather a discrepancy, because the first email was in English and the second one was in French. Sometimes translators miss a sentence. This explanation seems unlikely, though, because their service is uncommonly good in both languages.
Another possible explanation is that they realized I was right and the easiest solution was just to delete the sentence from the standard language in their emails.
I think that makes sense. It was inconsistent with the “terms and conditions” on their website anyway: “By completing the checkout and submitting an order through Voilà, you are agreeing to pay, in full, the prices of the items selected (or any substitutions accepted by you) and all applicable charges (such as charges for bags, deposits, delivery fees, etc), taxes, by credit card or other permitted payment method.”
(I did a comparison using the wayback machine and that sentence does not appear to have changed recently.)
The outcome I wanted was for them to uphold the fine print in their email and stop forcing expensive waste on customers, but it looks like at best I have annoyed them into deleting a sentence that could be used against them.
So far, anyway. My other two arguments remain good.
The parallels to our shared work are *exquisite.* Alas.
I had hoped you in particular would get a dark laugh out of this.