You are describing mandatory binding arbitration, eh?

No, this is an internal ombudsman - Google's own ombudsman who rescues customers when the Google processes frustrate.

Lots of companies need an ombudsman because they provide no way out when the normal processes let customers down.

It's like a backstop for customer satisfaction. A internal "court of appeal" to help customers out.

Kind of like having "a friend in the business", but available to any customer who needs it.

So right now they have an appeal form. It didn't work in the case above.

The difference after your change, is now you lose $50 and STILL have to post to twitter to try and get your problem solved.

The appeal form is not an actual person, the ombudsman would have a name and a face

What evidence do you have that the name and face would give you a different answer? Somehow paying $50 changes something?

Ombudsmen in other organisations seem to help?

What do you suggest we do?

How would it remain impartial/objective/effective? How is it different from a real call center support that you have to pay to access?

The whole point of an ombudsman is they operate outside the system and have a higher level of authority, vested in them by management.

They have authority, more or less, to "get shit done".

How? If the ombudsman is hired and paid by management?

It's just a VP of Support.

Now, if there were a few people chosen from among the users, and they could talk to management. That'd be something. (See EVE online's SMC - a council of players.)