I welcome an legalese to this thread, but what I’m really interested in is your opinion.
The hypo:
Man (we’ll call him Bob) in a restaurant finishes dining. Waitress slaps the 15 dollar tab on the table and says: “I’ll be right back”. Before she is able to return, Bob throws a 20 on the table and heads for the door.
Meanwhile, a customer at an adjacent table snatches the 20 with out anybody seeing him.
When the waitress returns to the table, she sees Bob is gone and no money on the table. She then proceeds to chase him down in the parking lot.
Who is responsible for paying this bill?
(It can’t be the thief, because nobody knows who he is)
The thief is morally responsible for paying the bill, because he stole the money. If the thief cannot be found, the restaurant has to eat the loss, for failing to exercise their due diligence in preventing theft. Unless they authorized the waitress to act on their behalf to stop people from stealing, and she agreed to cover the restaurant’s loss. Which she would be dumb to do, but sometimes people are dumb. Not the customer - he paid in good faith, and he owes no duty to the restaurant to make good their losses if they or the waitress screw up.
It’s pretty common and I’ve done it myself several times. However I still wouldn’t consider my bill paid if a 3rd party intercepted it before an authorised restaurant agent could see it. That would be on me.
Common or acceptable or not, anyone can skip out and claim that he left the money on the table. Bob is responsible for seeing that the waitress is paid, and he didn’t do that. It’s his problem.
Bob didn’t actually pay anyone. He left money in the open in a public place. It may work without a hitch 99% of the time, but when it doesn’t, it is the fault of the customer who didn’t complete the transaction.
Yes, I’ve certainly done so. I’d almost always wait to make sure the server actually got the cash, but there’s been at least a time or two when I’ve just gone ahead and left.
If this kind of thing happened to me, and the waitress chased me down for payment, I don’t know whether I’d feel responsible for repaying her or not—I think I probably would.
The moral responsibility is of course all on the thief. But the OP stipulates that he isn’t going to be caught, so one of the other three parties is going to have to eat the cost. (Just as, if the waitress had gotten the $20 and put it in her apron pocket, and another customer had yoinked it out of her apron without her noticing: either the waitress will have to cover the price of the meal herself, or the restaurant will have to eat the loss.)
So, I can’t decide whether it’s Bob or the restaurant who should be responsible for covering the loss. It might depend on the details of the situation. And if the waitress had taken an unreasonably long time coming back to the table (which isn’t what the OP said happened here), I might consider ascribing some of the responsibility to her.
The restaurant. It’s a no win situation and I wouldn’t chase a customer over a $15 tab.
But, most servers would see if the solo diner was ready to pay right then. That sounds like just an entree and drink, so there’s not much to look over on the tab.
From a legal standpoint, Bob’s on the hook if it is just his word that he paid by putting money on the table.
In the real world, it could likely play out in a number of ways. If I was Bob and the waitress chased me down in the parking lot and told me I hadn’t paid, I’d go back to the restaurant and ask some of the other patrons if they saw the money taken. If no one saw anything and there were no cameras on the table (an increasingly unlikely scenario), then I’d ask to talk to the manager. I’d explain what had happened from my point of view and let him decide. If I’m a regular, I’d expect (but not ask) that he’d write it off. If I’m not a regular, I’d still hope that he’d write it off. If he wanted payment, I’d pay.
In all cases, including being “comped” I’d tip the waitress again. She’s been stiffed as much as I have by the thief, and this how I roll in these kinds of situations.
If paying a ten grand debt by dropping a bag on a street corner were as commonly accepted as leaving a twenty on the table in a restaurant, you would have a point. But it isn’t.
The waitress leaves to give you time to pull a credit card out of your wallet. Or, if you’re paying cash, to avoid the awkward situation of counting out her tip in front of her.
I’d say “the restaurant” until something changes. Leaving money on the table, while inherently risky, is how things are done. If I was chased out to the parking lot and told I didn’t pay, I’d stand my ground. If they didn’t call the police, I would. It might sound like a jackass move, but if I put $20 on the table and now it’s gone someone walked off with it. Maybe the police can figure something out.
Like was stated upthread, if I’m a regular, I would expect it not to go that far. If I ended up paying a second time (and for $20, I’d do that before I ended up with a ticket or getting arrested), I can’t imagine I’d ever be back.
Now, I understand the argument that it’s Bob’s fault since he left the table unattended and all we have is his word. But, think about that, we also only have the word of the waitress that she didn’t pocket it. If Bob didn’t leave the money on the table, but instead handed it to her and then, when no one is looking she puts half in her pocket and claims she only got $10, who has to pony up the remaining $10? Bob, because he ‘didn’t’ giver her the correct amount? The waitress because Bob claims he did give her the money?
I don’t think this can be easily resolved since we’re in a situation where there was an unwitnessed party that manipulated things.
In a criminal trial - not that it is likely to get to that, but supposing - and nobody saw him pay and nobody saw the thief steal the money, if I were on the jury I would vote Not Guilty. Presumption of innocence - the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Bob didn’t pay.
In a civil trial, I believe the standard is “a preponderance of the evidence” if it is just Bob’s word against the waitress, that for Bob at worst is 50-50. That’s not a preponderance IMO.
In the real world, they would just ban Bob from the restaurant. Then he would dedicate his life to finding the real thief, find out that it was a conspiracy of inter-galactic space yaks, then he would organize a team of guerrilla ninjas to rescue the waitress from her abduction to the planet Bargo by Evil Emperor Noodnik, and escape in the nick of time when the entire planet explodes due to their sabotage of the pornium oxide fusion reactor.
Does the restaurant have CCTV? If so, Bob can tell them to rewind the tape, and see who got the money. If they see the theft on camera, then it’s no longer on Bob to pay.
If they can’t see it, then I think Bob still ought to pay.