I have evidence that Mr. Duan, who by the way is not a “perp”, was inclined “to correct the web list”, as you put it. In fact, I pointed it out to puzzlegal a few posts ago because she had missed that part of the email exchange.
What evidence do you have that Mr. Duan “showed no inclination to correct the web list”? Do you know he never before contacted the people who created and maintained his website? You have his phone records and emails and there is an absence of such communication? Do you have any evidence at all, other than the fact that the web page was outdated? :dubious:
Look. It’s not hard. Don’t use phrases that you don’t fully know the meanings of: this was not a bait and switch, nor, as far as I can tell, has any crime been committed.
Well yeah, I decided to break into Joe Friday mode. Also, “Bookem Danno” is from Hawaii 5-0 and it was a line generally delivered before “Murder One”. This case is somewhat less serious.
All the same, recognize that state consumer protection agencies tend to be underfunded and use kid gloves. So we shouldn’t freak out at that possibility either. The perp (ha!) would probably be able to claim first offense and get off with a warning, possibly unofficial. Maybe he’d be slapped around in a back room a little. (I kid.)
Look, we’re approaching a 10% discrepancy here, boosted with tax and tip. Business standards that don’t get enforced tend to fall away. So yeah, this problem needs to be addressed. Realize that most businesses would have fixed the problem upon first notification. This guy did not.
Oh yeah, Edelman isn’t necessarily a miser. It’s pretty clear that he’s a self appointed enforcer of some sort: he does this sort of thing with big companies as well. So do I in my own way.
Snowboarder Bo: Thanks. Here’s what I found at the FTC website: [INDENT]Pricing
**Are there any standards governing the advertising of prices?
**
The same standards for truthfulness apply when companies make claims about price comparisons, “sale” prices, and the like. For more information, ask the FTC for the Guides Against Deceptive Pricing. Since many pricing issues involve local practices, you also may want to contact the Attorney General’s office in the state(s) where you plan to advertise.
**What responsibility does a company have to make sure that prices are accurate?
**
In many jurisdictions, companies are legally required to charge no more than the advertised or shelf price for a product, so good pricing practices are important for both customer satisfaction and a company’s bottom line. For tips on accurate pricing practices in advertising and in retail stores, ask the FTC for Good Pricing Practices? SCAN DO. [/INDENT] By my reading if there is systematic mispricing, the FTC might be interested. But at a restaurant, it would be mostly a matter for state law. Which implies an even thinner internet trial. I suspect there are few enforcement actions, as most businesses don’t like irritating their customers and having to explain themselves. Bait and switch is another category though: that’s a more common concern. But again: my WAG.
ETA: Cross post!
ETA2: Leaffan: It’s not just $4 because Edelman almost surely wasn’t the only person scammed.
ETA3: Perp stands for perpetrator. Technically accurate!
Thank you, Sampiro. As usual you have articulated what I felt and could not find words for.
Restaurant? Bag of dicks. Seriously. Their first response was NOT to refund.
Law prof? Also bag of dicks, impossible to sympathize with jackass. But right. And actually looking out for you and me, were we to be customers of take-out Chinese in Boston.
My company designs, manages and provides content for websites (I’m in content, not design)
Really - from what I see everyday, the idea of an out of date website is really common, as is the idea that they will have to go to someone else to get it updated.
And for many - they only have a website “just because it is expected” - rather than for any real business reasons.
That said - it seems like pretty poor website design in this instance - it’s really not hard a design consultant to foresee this sort of problem - and provide a range of solutions
this would naturally include
a) A disclaimer at the the top of the page re accuracy of pricing (not hidden in the t and c)
b) A CMS to allow the restaurant to upload a PDF of current pricing
c) A download menu item - with a CMS allowing the restaurant to easily and quickly update the file
“Showed no interest prior to his third email”, then. Shoulda been his first, definitely his second.
To be clear though, it’s good that this wasn’t taken to the enforcement level; I don’t want to leave the impression that agency involvement would be the best outcome. Typically merchants and customers sensibly settle before that point. As they should, IMHO.
While I’m here, I’d also like to concede (following Joey P’s post) that in most customer - retail disputes, the customer is being more of a dick. IMHO, from what I’ve observed in stores as a shopper.
No worries, and I thought it was fine in this forum.
D’Anconia: Funny you should say that. I caught Walgreens (different company, same prefix) screwing up prices constantly years ago. I arranged for refunds more times that I’d like to admit, given the small amounts and 10-15 minutes involved. That behavior of their’s was disturbingly systematic. Perhaps that colored my response here. I ended up shifting my business elsewhere for a spell.
Walmart isn’t a small mom and pop operation; it would be expected that their website would be current. But what if they had a bottle of shampoo on their website for $5.99 and when you got the the store it was $6.99? The Walmart lawyers would eat your lunch if you tried to sue over that.
Some of the responses in this thread are hilarious and really accentuate the litigious and confrontational attitudes of a lot of US citizens. It’s really sad actually. I can’t speak for the rest of the planet, but holy shit, it’s only a few bucks due to a website that (admittedly) wasn’t updated. Get over it.
Aye, I’ve said that I didn’t think Mr. Duan’s handling of the situation was at all optimal. My first reply to the customer would have been “I’m sorry that those prices are out of date. I found your receipt and refunded the $4 to your credit card. Please accept this ‘buy 1 get 2’ coupon for your next visit, good for your entire meal. At Sichuan Garden we value our customers highly and are taking steps to ensure that our site is updated as soon as possible. Thank you for drawing this to our attention and for your understanding.”
Really, most people don’t just want to be dicks. And most people are actually pretty honest. Both parties in this case kinda missed their mark, tho.
If it were Walmarts website it would actually have the potential to scam people. You can buy things on walmart.com So if it said my widget was 4 dollars and charged me 5 It would be actual fraud.
The restaurants website had no shopping cart function. It had no ability to overcharge or undercharge as it didn’t charge at all.
It was essentially a picture of a old menu. Anyone wishing to make a purchase would have to contact the restaurant by phone or go in person, in which case they’d have ample opportunity to be informed of what the actual costs would be before paying.
The fact that it is an advertisement (with which I fully agree) is not controlling. An advertisement is not binding on a merchant, but that doesn’t mean a merchant has no duty to advise its customers that it is not honoring a posted price.
If I see an ad for a $500 Ford, and go to the Ford dealer, they are free to tell me they are not actually selling any Fords for $500. That’s their job, though. The law doesn’t allow them to quietly sell me a Ford for $600 and hope I don’t notice.
Edelman is absolutely in the right here. A dick, sure, but a correct dick. This narrative that the restaurant is some kind of “mom and pop” affair run by pitiful immigrants is (1) inaccurate (they have at least three locations, and quick access to attorneys specializing in commercial law), and (2) irrelevant. They fucked up, and in the process undoubtedly fucked over lots of people who were also fooled. If you can’t keep your commercial website updated, don’t have a website - or make sure you tell your customers it’s inaccurate.
Would I have done this? No, because I don’t fuck with people who fuck with my food, and $4 isn’t worth getting upset about - but I’m glad he did.
How would they do that? You go into the dealership because you saw an advertisement for a 500 dollar ford pinto. You say I want to buy a Ford pinto. They say sure that will be 600 bucks. That’s where this should have stopped. You have the option of not buying the car because it isn’t the 500 dollars you were expecting.
It’s certainly shitty customer service on the restaurants part. They should have been on top of the issue and if it actually fell through the cracks they should have offered better compensation than honoring the outdated prices.
Mr duchebag however paid the 600 bucks either because he was looking to make an issue of it or he didn’t actually remember the advertisement said 500, he drove it home then went on to try and extort money from the dealership by missrepresenting law he is highly qualified in.
Their website has a disclaimer at the top that says “menus and prices may vary by location.”
The prick who tried to bully them into giving him his food for half price under legal threats (before backing down and dropping the matter and apologizing) seemed to have originally been working on a theory that this disclaimer was not valid. He said he thought this was the case because the owner told him the prices had been out of date for ‘quite some time’ in an email.
From that, he was making the leap that it proved the owner knew the prices were out of date for quite some time and took no steps to change it. But in court it could have come out that the owner only realized it at the moment of this complaint, and upon realizing it, also realized that it had been that way for quite some time.
Is there a legal definition for how much time “quite some time” is, and if so, is there a limit on how much time a menu item can be out of date before the disclaimer stating that prices may vary is no longer any protection?
If you search Google for “menu disclaimer” or “prices may vary” etc. you will find millions of results, many of which are restaurants with online menus that may be subject to change and may not reflect the actual prices of the menu items. Are the legal counselors of all of these millions of restaurants operating under a misconception?
I am not a lawyer but I don’t think his theory was ironclad. In court, their website menu disclaimer may have protected them. He not only would have not gotten his $12 and half-price food, he might have been paying their court costs and legal bills, which aren’t free for them like they are for him.
As for the restaurant, judging by reaction on theirfacebook page they have seen quite an outpouring of support and have gained a lot of new customers over this story.
