Availability SLA Credit Dispute
CloudCRM provides a CRM SaaS under a contract with a 99.9% monthly availability SLA. Availability is defined as the percentage of minutes the service is available, excluding scheduled maintenance announced at least 48 hours in advance. In October, synthetic monitoring recorded a 43-minute unplanned outage. There was also a two-hour maintenance window for an emergency security patch, announced 24 hours in advance. The provider’s dashboard reports 99.93% availability and excludes both events; the customer calculates 99.66% and demands service credits. The contract also excludes 'emergency maintenance' but does not define it. October has 44,640 minutes. The service review is next week, and the account manager wants to avoid a credit payout while preserving the relationship.
1. Calculate the plausible availability figures and decide whether a service credit is owed. Show your reasoning.
Read the worked answer
Start from the total minutes: 44,640. If only the 43-minute unplanned outage counts, availability is (44,640 − 43) / 44,640 = 99.9037%, which is above 99.9% and would not trigger a credit. If the 120-minute maintenance window also counts, availability is (44,640 − 163) / 44,640 = 99.635%, which is below 99.9% and would trigger a credit. The customer’s 99.66% is consistent with counting both events.
The decision therefore turns on whether the maintenance exclusion applies. The scheduled-maintenance clause requires 48 hours’ notice; this window had 24 hours, so it does not qualify as scheduled maintenance. The separate emergency-maintenance exclusion could apply, but the contract does not define 'emergency'. A security patch may reasonably be an emergency, yet that must be evidenced: a documented vulnerability, a risk assessment, and a decision that the patch could not wait 48 hours. Without that evidence, the exclusion is weak and the customer’s calculation is defensible.
The account manager should not simply deny the credit. The correct outcome depends on applying the contract definitions transparently, not on the desired payout result.
2. What service level management changes would reduce future disputes?
Read the worked answer
Define the measurement system before the next dispute. Specify the monitoring source, the calculation method, the sampling interval, and who has access to raw data. Define 'emergency maintenance' objectively: what qualifies, who authorises it, what evidence is retained, and how notice is given. If emergency maintenance is excluded, require a post-event report to the customer. Consider capping or separately reporting excluded minutes so the customer can see both gross and adjusted availability.
Add a monthly service review that presents availability, incidents, maintenance, and credits using the same data the customer sees. Include a dispute-resolution step with a joint review of evidence. Review whether a 99.9% target is appropriate for the service and whether credits are proportional to impact. For the provider, implement internal change controls so maintenance windows are planned with the required notice unless a documented emergency exists.
These changes turn an argument about numbers into a shared measurement process.
3. How should the provider communicate the outcome to the customer?
Read the worked answer
Acknowledge the customer’s calculation and explain the provider’s calculation openly, showing the minutes, the exclusions applied, and the contractual basis for each. Avoid hiding behind the dashboard. If the emergency-maintenance exclusion is valid, provide the evidence that made it an emergency; if it is not valid, concede the credit rather than damaging trust over a small amount.
Separate the commercial decision from the relationship conversation. The account manager can say: 'Here is how the SLA applies, here is the evidence, and here is what we will change so this is unambiguous next month.' Offer a joint review of the October data and a revised maintenance-notice procedure. If a credit is owed, process it promptly and confirm the calculation. If no credit is owed, offer a service improvement plan rather than simply refusing. Document the agreed interpretation so future reviews are consistent.