Please enter the following details
Read the following scenario and answer the THREE questions that follow.
Ms. Vineeta Lama, a respected figure in the small town of Jampur, found herself stranded on the road, once again, when her old small hatchback car broke down. Finding herself alone on the deserted road with no one to help, Vineeta, in desperation called Shyam Saigal, the General Manager of Balaji Motors − the only dealership in Jampur that sells Diplomatico cars, the brand that Vineeta drives. Vineeta knew Shyam from her frequent visits for getting her hatchback car serviced. Surprisingly, he arrived within fifteen minutes, accompanied by a mechanic from his dealership. Further, he arranged for the vehicle to be towed and kindly offered Vineeta a ride home. On the way back, he advised Vineeta to exchange her old car with a new Sports Utility Vehicle (SUV) on a good discount from his dealership. He assured her that he would add several additional services to ensure her SUV remained in excellent condition for many years ahead.
Three months passed. While returning from a friend’s house, Vineeta’s new SUV was hit by another car. Fortunately, she was not injured, but the SUV was badly damaged. Surprisingly, when Vineeta took the car for repairs to Balaji Motors, she was told that the repairs would not cost her anything as the extended warranty on her car covered such accidents. Vineeta could not recall purchasing such a warranty; hence, she contacted Shyam. Shyam informed her that the extended warranty was mistakenly punched into her contract by an executive. As this mistake could not be reversed due to the company’s rigid policies, Shyam bore the cost of Rs. 19,000. He further added that Vineeta should consider it a gift from Balaji Motors for purchasing the highest-priced Diplomatico SUV.
As Vineeta rode back home, she wondered if she should pay Rs. 19,000 to Shyam since the extended warranty came to her aid that day.
Which of the following is the MOST compelling rationale for Vineeta to justify not paying Rs. 19,000 to Shyam?
Option B is the best rationale for Vineeta. Here’s why:
Bargaining Leverage: By mentioning this common practice, Vineeta can initiate a negotiation with Shyam. She can argue that since the mistake resulted in a benefit she might have expected anyway, it can be considered a wash.
Option A- Price Comparison: Even if a similar SUV from Panther might have been cheaper without an extended warranty, it doesn't negate the fact that the warranty is now covering Vineeta's repairs.
Option C- Time Passed: The time gap doesn't change the fact that the mistake benefited Vineeta.
Option D is entirely focused on the past (she wasn't aware). It doesn't address the current situation or a potential solution.
Option E- Shyam's Need: This puts the responsibility on Shyam to ask for the money back, rather than Vineeta taking the initiative to return it, especially since the mistake benefitted her.
Create a FREE account and get:
- All Quant Formulas and shortcuts PDF
- 15 XAT previous papers with solutions PDF
- XAT Trial Classes for FREE
