[DENIED] Enforcement of inaccurate timeframe/quoted times.

sure that way could work but in that case the responsibility should be on the service provider, same as you have to provide info its its being botted, or if its being outsourced.

If, as a service provider, you cant back up when you're offering then you shouldn't be saying that estimate.

 

You've literally just said it yourself - estimate.

It is absolutely inevitable that issues will arise from time to time and there will be delays; no service can provide a 100% success rate, just like in the real world. It seems like most people here agree on a very sensible way of sorting this, which is the route that I (and several others) have explained. Legitimate service providers will do their best to provide an accurate timeframe as it's literally in their best interest to do so. Whilst I do support compensation (if it has been fully outlined and agreed upon), I think this will just lead to the majority of providers giving longer estimates so they can work without the added stress of decreased profits.

What next? We bring in a rule which forces customers to pay an added premium if their order is completed early?

 

This suggestion has been denied.

Currently, it is handled on a case by case basis, and it's best to stay that way.