15% added for parties of 6 or more, legally enforceable?

[Random]

This thread has exhausted whatever patience I allegedly have with the Nonsense Law Poster Crew.

Also, I think it’s now apparent to everyone who might read this thread that some posters are speaking sense, and others are speaking nonsense.

[DrDeth]

@Random

This is the only part of DrDeth’s post that I care to respond to.

If I’m not a lawyer, I must be pretty amazing, considering the following:
)

My freind- in no way shape or form was I doubting that you are a Lawyer. I have not said that. I believe you. But that still doesn’t mean the the Staff at the SDMB are going to get into the business of verifing and confirming posters claims as to the IRL occupations. Same with Police Officers, Doctors, CPA’s or any Profession. We simply accept you are who you say you are, and why should it be elsewise? Ihave never doubted that you are who you claim to be.

Nor would I even want to verify your IRL ID- that “crosses a line” IMHO. You are Random, a Charter Member. Other than SDSAB, Moderator and Adminstrator- all the rest of us are either Guests, Members or Charter Members. We don’t have “Members who are verified by the SDMB to be IRL CPA’s/Doctors/Nurses/Military/Lawyers/and so on” nor should we, I think. Do we really want to go there?

I thank you for your patient and well-educated thoughts, here as in other threads. Please do not consider my general thoughts a personal attack, they were not so, nor were they intended to be taken that way.

[Duggy_Fizzle]

I think much of the disagreement here comes from people considering that the service and food were horrible. Let’s clarify the question…

Let’s all assume the food was brought to the table exactly as it was ordered, and the service was quick and attentive. Do the customers still have a right to fight the 15% added gratuity on parties of six or more if it is clearly stated on the menu?

[Frylock]

@Duggy Fizzle

I think much of the disagreement here comes from people considering that the service and food were horrible. Let’s clarify the question…

Let’s all assume the food was brought to the table exactly as it was ordered, and the service was quick and attentive. Do the customers still have a right to fight the 15% added gratuity on parties of six or more if it is clearly stated on the menu?

I would be very very suprised if they did have that right.

-FrL-

[glee]

@Duggy Fizzle

I think much of the disagreement here comes from people considering that the service and food were horrible. Let’s clarify the question…

Let’s all assume the food was brought to the table exactly as it was ordered, and the service was quick and attentive. Do the customers still have a right to fight the 15% added gratuity on parties of six or more if it is clearly stated on the menu?

I think much of the confusion here comes from non-lawyers making claims.
Are you going to reply to post 44?

The original question was “If I have terrible service: long waits, wrong orders, rude service, food spilled on me, can I just not include the the tip portion or am I responsible for paying it?”

How does your completely different scenario post ‘clarify’ this?

[amarone]

According to this, a “gratuity” is optional by definition and cannot be forced. On the other hand, a “mandatory service charge” can be imposed.

[Random]

@Duggy Fizzle

I think much of the disagreement here comes from people considering that the service and food were horrible. Let’s clarify the question…

Let’s all assume the food was brought to the table exactly as it was ordered, and the service was quick and attentive. Do the customers still have a right to fight the 15% added gratuity on parties of six or more if it is clearly stated on the menu?

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

[DrDeth]

@Random

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Counselor, I concur.

Read the thread dudes. (hint, the answer was given, it’s “NO”)

[psychloan]

@DrDeth

I had heard that it was thought in some areas of this nation that certain “races” would stiff or even walk without paying, and that certain “coffee-shop” type restaurants would require that that ethnicity pay a certain tip or even pay up front.

If you go to discussion boards for waiters (or for pizza delivery people), you will see that there is a strong perception that all races are not equal when it comes to tipping. No doubt it’s this sort of prejudice (postjudice?) that motivated the Dade County ordinance.

[flight]

I want to take a moment to thank the posters who have taken the time to answer my question, particularly [Random**.

@Random

Question 1: Is a mandatory gratuity that is disclosed to the diner ahead of time a binding, contractual obligation?

Yes. While a state law banning such a result may possibly exist somewhere, no one’s identified such a law.

Excellent. That was exactly what I wanted to know.

Question 2: If the service is terrible, to a degree that the restaurant/server have materially failed to perform their obligations under the contract, may the diner legally refuse to pay the gratuity?

Yes, in general. The antecedent breach of the contract by the server/restaurant, if not corrected, may excuse the diner from paying the service charge. So the diner complains before eating the food, and the service deficiences are significant, and the restaurant fails to correct the problem, the diner may legally refuse to pay the full service charge.

OK, a little fuzzier. No one has a question that the wrong food, or terrible food does not require payent so long as you don’t eat more than a bite or two. This was brought up several times, but was never in doubt. The service is the question, and specifically how it relates to required tipping.

To be a little more specific than before, once a gratuity is automatically added for a large group, is the gratuity still a separate fee for the service, or inseperable from the meal?

For example: if I have a wonderfully prepared meal but after I finish the last scrumptious bite the waitress shits on my table and curses us out, would I have a legal leg to stand on in denying to pay the gratuity portion of the bill, as they failed to provide a bare minimum of service, while still paying for the food? Would the gratuity be considered part of the entire bill to be contested as a whole only? This wasn’t completely clear from your explanation.

Oh, and to the many people who mentioned this, I know that almost any restaurant would do what is necessary to make things right without involving the authorities. That is why I specifically mentioned it in the OP. This is more of a specific question on how the law sees the issue rather than how to go about practically handling it.