The man was banned by Tencent because of WeChat, and Tencent lost 1.5 million. What's the problem?

If WeChat is blocked and jumps off a building, many people will feel incredible, but this thing really happened. The jumping place is the user reception center of Shenzhen Tencent Company. According to Mr. Tang, the elder brother of the deceased, his younger brother Tang Mouhui is only 2 1 year old this year. He and his parents run a department store and a grain and oil store in Shenzhen, and usually use WeChat to collect money. However, his WeChat was suddenly blocked, and then he repeatedly turned to WeChat robot customers, with no results. In order to collect money normally, I went to Tencent at the weekend to find a solution. As a result, I don't know why Tang Mouhui jumped from Tencent's user reception center and died. After the incident, Tang Jia rushed to Shenzhen. Because there is no evidence to prove that his brother's fall was directly related to the closure of WeChat, after four mediations by Tencent, Mr. Tang signed a letter of commitment with Tencent, and Tencent was in humanitarian compensation of 1.5 million yuan, so his family could not pursue it. However, after signing the letter of commitment, Mr. Tang retrieved his brother's mobile phone from the police and found that a video recorded by his brother before his death described the cause and effect of suicide in detail. It turned out that my brother WeChat didn't know why it was blocked after it was blocked. He complained many times and asked for robot customer service. The manual customer failed many times. Because it involves daily collection and use, he went to the Tencent reception center to find out why the account was blocked, but no one took care of it. In view of the bad mood of the past few days, I can't relax for the time being.

On the same day, Tencent provided a case description to the media, clarifying the relationship between the person who fell from the building and Tencent, because the Tencent User Reception Center does not provide services to the outside world on weekends, and Tencent employees have no contact with the person who fell from the building. It was also found that the account of the deceased was blocked for 72 hours because it was reported that it was related to pornography, and it was unsealed that day. Appraised by the public security organs, the person who fell from the building committed suicide.

Is Tencent really not responsible? Is it really kind to give humanitarian compensation of 6.5438+0.5 million?

Although Tang Mouhui's death from a building is extreme, is Tencent really not responsible? As such a big Internet company, its customer service quality is clear at a glance. First of all, online customer service has certainly not been explained clearly, because what is the topic and how to deal with it in the future. If Tang Mouhui learned that there was only a three-day ban, I believe he would not be so anxious. This is the cause of this tragedy. For Tang Mouhui who needs WeChat to collect money, he needs to find a way to solve it. Of course, he can also choose to change his mobile phone number and register a new WeChat for business. However, he didn't. He chose to go directly to the company headquarters to solve the problem. However, the customer service at the company headquarters is even more indifferent, and no one directly takes care of it. Some people say: this is the weekend, and the customer service is not at work. But does such a big company really have no customer service staff to work on weekends? It's unbelievable to think about it. Tencent makes so much profit every year, isn't there any after-sales problem to solve? Does it cost a lot of money to invite a client? So Tencent has a problem because their customer service is not in place, which led to this tragedy. Whether online or in the office area, this tragedy can be avoided as long as someone has enough patience to explain to him the handling methods, waiting time and handling results here.

From a legal point of view, it is difficult for Tencent to win the case. After all, with deep pockets, a large number of senior lawyers and perfect overlord clauses, it can be foolproof. But this time, it is reasonable to use 6.5438+0.5 million yuan to deal with the customer's falling incident caused by his customer service inaction. Why not?