Relatively speaking, the defects on stainless steel are easier to identify the source. For example, defects in raw materials and defects caused during processing can be easily identified if inspection efforts are in place. Therefore, for disputes over the external processing of stainless steel, the disputes are generally not "should I be responsible" but "how much responsibility should I bear". We can look at the following case. The customer commissioned a machining center to process Kaiping a batch of stainless steel coils. The flat plate found periodic dents on the surface of the plate after being sent to the user. Through the inspection cycle, it can be determined that it is caused by the pinch roller of the Kaiping machine. The customer filed a claim with the processing center. The processing center acknowledged the cause of the defect, but the processing center stated that it could not accept the customer’s compensation. These flat plates are fixed-length flat plates, and the pressure points on the surface of the plates are serious, so the value of the flat plates is greatly reduced. Customers estimate that there is a loss of at least 2,000 yuan per ton of flat plates. This batch of flat plates has a total of 5 tons, so the customer made a claim of 10,000 yuan to the processing center. However, the processing center believes that for this foreign processing list, the processing cost is 80 yuan per ton, and the total processing cost is only 400 yuan. Instead, it is now required to claim 10,000 yuan, which is unacceptable in any case. At present, the rough processing equipment (shearing) of stainless steel in China shows a trend of increasing transition, and the processing cost is already marginal or even unprofitable. In this case, the tolerance of the processing center to the quality objection itself is weak. From the perspective of the survival of the enterprise, the huge difference between the processing cost and the compensation amount must be considered. We don’t have to go deep into the final result of this case. The key is what conclusions and revelations we can draw from this case. From the customer's point of view, considering that such a situation may occur, it is better to rely on oneself rather than oneself, and dispatch a copyman to strictly check the processing quality. This is a good method. For processing centers, especially those with simple management, negligence is always inevitable, then some exemption regulations can be proposed before a processing order is simply accepted, or a compensation standard can be agreed, such as how many times the processing cost, etc. In short, it’s always good to plan ahead. Don’t wait until the dispute arises to remedy it. At that time, it may cost several times the manpower and financial resources, and it is not a satisfactory ending in the end.