The Ferry Notice: Choosing Between 'Refund' and 'Compensate'
Harbour Line Ferries runs three vessels across a 6 km channel, carrying about 900 passengers a day. Last winter storms forced 11 days of cancellations and produced 62 written complaints, most about how refunds were handled. The company's operations manager has asked you, a temporary editorial assistant, to finalise the English text of a notice to be posted at both piers and on the website. The office assistant drafted the key sentence three ways:
A. Passengers will be given back their money if the boat does not sail. B. Passengers whose sailings are cancelled will receive a full refund. C. The company will compensate passengers for cancelled sailings.
The draft also contains the closing line 'We are sorry for the trouble.' The manager wants one sentence that is clear to occasional travellers, defensible if a complaint reaches a consumer tribunal, and consistent with the company's existing terms, which promise 'a full refund of the fare paid' and say nothing about extra costs such as taxis or hotels.
1. Choose between B and C for the notice. Justify the choice using denotation, collocation and legal exposure, and say what is wrong with A.
Read the worked answer
Choose B.
- Denotation: refund means giving back money that was paid - exactly the company's undertaking. Compensate means making good a loss, and its object is the loss, not the price: one compensates someone for damage, delay, injury or inconvenience. A cancelled crossing costs the fare, but it may also cost a taxi or a hotel night.
- Collocation: full refund is a fixed, familiar phrase in consumer English and matches the terms word for word ('a full refund of the fare paid'). Compensate passengers for cancelled sailings is grammatical but reads as an open-ended promise; the preposition for invites the question 'for how much?'.
- Legal exposure: a notice is treated as a statement of what the company will do. Promising to compensate arguably commits Harbour Line to out-of-pocket losses the terms exclude. Using the terms' own word keeps the notice inside the contract.
- Why not A: it is understandable but too informal for a posted notice ('given back their money'), it never says who pays or when, and 'if the boat does not sail' is ambiguous - a two-hour technical delay, a diverted sailing and a cancellation are not the same event. B names the trigger precisely: whose sailings are cancelled.
2. Rewrite the closing line for the posted notice, and explain one lexical and one pragmatic change you made.
Read the worked answer
Suggested rewrite: 'We apologise for the inconvenience this causes.'
- Lexical change: sorry for the trouble is conversational and vague; apologise for + the nominalised the inconvenience is the standard service register and names the specific harm (disrupted travel) rather than a generic 'trouble'.
- Pragmatic change: 'this causes' anchors the apology to the cancellations actually described above, so it reads as an acknowledgement of a real event rather than a boilerplate formula. That matters because the draft's phrasing, and the common variant 'any inconvenience caused', uses any, which minimises the harm and can sound like a refusal to admit that harm occurred.
- What to avoid: do not upgrade to 'we sincerely regret any distress suffered' - the mismatch in scale between a missed ferry and distress makes the notice sound insincere and, again, hints at liability beyond the fare.
3. One sailing moves from 07:00 to 09:00 on the same Saturday. The assistant writes: 'The 07:00 sailing has been delayed to 09:00.' Explain why this is a poor choice and write a better sentence for the notice.
Read the worked answer
Why it is poor: delay prototypically describes something held up while still under way or expected imminently - a delayed train, a delayed flight. Used with a fixed timetable slot, 'delayed to 09:00' blurs two different facts: the departure has been rescheduled, and passengers must now replan their morning. It also invites a question the notice cannot answer on the spot ('delayed by what?'), and the passive leaves the reader unsure whether the vessel is already boarding.
Better: 'The 07:00 sailing will now depart at 09:00.'
- Active and declarative: the new time is stated as a fact, not as a delay to be interpreted.
- Will now depart signals a change from a published timetable, which is what actually happened.
- If the change is to another day, postponed until Sunday is right; if the time merely shifts, rescheduled or will now depart is right. Keep one word for one situation across the whole notice - inconsistency between 'delayed' here and 'cancelled' elsewhere is what generates the complaints the company is trying to reduce.