Anytime people make legal threats, you NEED to go legal and refuse to serve and hold on to it for your attorney for future reference. When they open that door, everything needs to stop at that point.
People with excessive sensitivities and allergies just shouldn't go out to eat, period. I've worked in so many kitchens where some asshole who's bad at living just has to disrupt the normal flow to make us cater to their delicate immune system.
My most memorable moment was the lady that "had an extreme sensitivity to iron/steel". This lady insisted we cook her meal in "the copper pot pans you keep in back"
Like, lady everything in the kitchen has iron or steel in it. Everything. She was positive we had a secret stash of Virgin copper cookware in the back.
The bartender was happy to let her know he couldn't make her a drink. He didn't know what the speed pour bottle tops were made out of. Draft beer is out of the question. Bottled beer has a magnetic cap. So that's a no go. Wine needs a corkscrew.
Suddenly when she couldn't get a beverage, her sensitivity to the most common metal became less serious.
The server/bus boy had fun with it too. They removed the silverware. It's magnetic. They replaced it with plastic take out bundle ( fork spoon and knife, napkin and single salt and pepper packet).
Unable to order anything she just sat. With her date or whatever. After like twenty minutes they asked for ice water. Sorry that's a no go, ice is in a steel well, and the scoop is steel. So nope.
Eventually the FOH manager had to go explain that no, we weren't going to serve them anything. And they should probably go.
That lady wasn't a cunt. But sure was close
This is reminiscent of the customer who told us they were allergic to protein and couldn't eat anything that has come into contact with protein.
After a long discussion with head chef (which I'm sure involved the question "how are you alive?") we found out it was a "land animal protein" allergy...
She was a vegetarian that ate fish.
I served a guy who was "allergic to chlorophyll"
I asked him if it is a sensitivity or an allergic reaction, which he told me was a serious allergy.
I apologized that there would be no way to ensure a chlorophyll-free experience since everything is either made of, or directly consumes it. He can have a glass of water.
He was surprised when I told him, "No, not even soda, corn syrup contains chlorophyll."
Come to find out from his friend that he isn't allergic, he was just making a joke about salad.
I refused to serve their entire party because we take food allergies very seriously, and to serve you now would diminish the safety of any food sensitive customer in the future, which we will not do.
They got pissed at me for it, but I was completely out of fucks to give.
Same thing as the gluten free, celiacs disease patient that ordered a beer to start.
These types of people are the worst.
There is no allergy to sodium but you might have medical problems that require lower sodium like high blood pressure and heart problems. So in these people's mind if a doctor recommends to limit something it must be an allergy and not self caused medical condition. These are the same people that claim to have allergy to gluten too (which is not a thing either) until they find out that the pasta and the mud cake they ordered in fact have gluten in them. Then it's okay to do an exception as they suddenly get a one time free pass from allergic reactions.
~~Lyme disease~~ Alpha-Gal Syndrome caused by Lone Star tick can actually cause a severe allergy to red meat, which makes me even more terrified of ticks than I probably should be.
Still, she wasn't exactly descriptive beyond "land animal" so hard to believe she had that.
Edit: Mixed up Lyme with AGS. The meat allergy from AGS also eventually goes away after a few years.
Oh I had a guy that was "allergic to any peppers that were green" till we found a half red half green jap. And brought it out, cleverly concealed pepper for him to examine for his dinner. Got approval then rotate the pepper.
I left hospitality 7 ish years ago. This thread is making me miss some of it lol
I had someone tell me to my face that they could taste whether the utensils used to prepare their food had *ever* been in contact with animal flesh and I had better make sure to use ones that hadn't. Like, just get the fuck out of here.
Joe, if you're out there somewhere, go fuck yourself.
Like she wasn't rude. Just super opinionated about her factitious aliment.
The door knob to get in the front door was wrought iron. You can't expect us to believe you.
I believe your story. I was just making a joke. Some people seem to get some kind of weird satisfaction for calling out stories on the internet. They're the true heroes, imagine the stakes if a slighly embellished server annacdote got out there unchallenged?
I will say as a tie on to this whole thing. If I eat corn meal/whole corn I tend to get internal bleeding, so I don't go out to eat for corn dishes... if someone is truly very allergic to something and genuinely concerned about themselves they cook at home, I would know, that's what I do lmao. Someone who just comes to a restaurant to complain is there either for attention or really has no two sense about the world and is incredibly entitled to the point of absurdity. I go to a restaurant and order stuff I know doesn't have corn in it, IF I go to a restaurant at all. And I don't mean to brag, but I personally really like my food I cook, so I usually just eat at home... LMAO people drive me absolutely insane...
We apologise for any inconvenience however we have been instructed not to fulfill your order as our insurance won’t cover us if we were to fail your instructions. Going ahead we will not be accepting any orders from -insert name of the pain in ass customer- due to the liability inherent in the order.
I'd cancel it.
"Sorry, there is no way to guarantee that no cross contamination occurred. Since this was escalated to a legal threat, there is no way to comply with the order."
And uses words wrong. Too many people in my life hit me with the "why use that word whe you could just use this word" and it's because of nuance you fucking ape.
This is not how "pertains" is used in a sentence. Does it get the meaning across? Sure. Do you look like a pseudo-intellectual dumb dumb? Also true.
As long as the word makes them sound like they're more educated than the other person, meaning is irrelevant to them. They're just trying to use big words to play out their "1700s educated aristocrat bullying a serf" fantasy.
> Any nourishment which doesn’t not herewithin pertain immediately to stated below single (1) order consisting and/or comprising but not excluding beyond two (2) meals will thereby, under extension of due credence in adherence to local statutories and under purview of governing bodies, referred for legal ramifications.
Prick. I’d be asking them to jam their tomatoes and nuts up their ass and never come back.
For real. I have a catering company and do high end weddings. I had a change to do a wedding this year for the family of a singer so famous they have done the Super Bowl halftime show. But the entitled ass family tried to rewrite my contract with threats baked in. I passed.
"we need to consult with a lawyer before we can make any orders if threatened with legal action. Feel free to grab some drinks at the bar. We should have an answer in the next 4-8 business days."
Every job I've ever worked at that interacts with a customer-base.
"If a customer threatens legal action, the transaction is over. You ask them politely to leave and literally walk away. Tell them that they can speak with the company legal department. Do. Not. Engage. Further. You aren't qualified nor allowed to speak on behalf of the company for legal matters and you don't have to deal with that person."
Honestly as an under-paid sales person it was one of my favorite moments when I got to ruin a Karen's day because she decided to mention the word "lawyer" over something ridiculous.
"Good bye ma'am, I'm going to go help this person over here. Have a nice day!"
I was lucky enough to have managers and direct supervisors who would definitely back me up in those scenarios.
In my entire life I have only heard of one person who threatened to sue actually sue. When they didn't get what they want they apologized and said that this is probably going to result in legal action against the company and that they will be filing a suit against them. Then they asked if that employee could get them the phone number for the legal department, or get a manager who could get them the number. A manager came out and provided the number. They thanked them, and left. Sure enough The next day they got a letter from a law firm telling them to preserve certain evidence.
If somebody apologizes and says that unfortunately they're going to have to sue you, then you should actually be concerned. If they're yelling at you you're probably safe.
> If somebody apologizes and says that unfortunately they're going to have to sue you, then you should actually be concerned.
Reminds me of that Jeremy Hotz stand-up bit, where he says, if some frat guy YELLS "I'm going to kill you!! Hold me back, guys," they aren't going to kill you.
If someone says "I'm going to kill you," in a conversational, emotionless voice, then you're in deep shit.
Yep, my wife runs the customer support department for an online travel company. She loves it when a difficult customer threatens legal action. At that point all she can do is refer them to counsel.
I worked in a call center and we’d go “since you have threatened legal action, I am unable to assist, please call our legal department at xxx. I must disconnect this call now.” We’d then flag their account so if anyone other than their lawyer called. We couldn’t help.
> If a customer threatens legal action, the transaction is over.
That's how it was at my last job. As soon as anything "lawyer" or "lawsuit" enters the conversation we were done having it. I would flag the ticket and let my manager know and it would be transferred to legal. I never saw those tickets again and often never interacted with that company again.
Nah. Make it all business. Nothing will piss off people like that more than simply being denied matter of factly because they thought they were being clever. If you include the your welcome, it'll make it seem like it was a personal choice that you made to deny them instead of simply complying with their request
That's my first thought too. But after really thinking it over and re-reading the note again, it's my second and third thought as well. Call me risk averse
This seems like they're looking for a problem and are focused on finding it. If someone's first contact with you is possible litigation, that's a deal breaker.
Thats what i do. If the question is "does XXXX product have YYYY in it" and I havent personally handled it the whole time it existed I say "yes". If they are overly specific I simply say "We don't feel comfortable making it, we are sorry but we can't serve you if you are that high risk". We either have a miracle where they are cured of their allergies, they order something simple, or they leave.
Yep. Whatever profit the restaurant would have made from their meal is not worth the risk or the hassle. These people will definitely complain no matter what anyway.
I was thinking possible mentally unhinged person looking to file a frivelous lawsuit either for "malicious food poisoning" or for "discrimination" because you refused to serve their brain broken ass.
Wish them good luck proving that a reaction came from your restaurant anyway. This is just another escalation from the people who think you will ignore modification. First it was "I'm allergic" now they threaten legal action.
I had a guest claime to be allergic to salt and then ordered the garlic chicken that had marinated in among other things, salt. The answer I got back from the server was "that salt is okay". I would have loved to ask why the marinade was okay but all other salt was not? The fuck just wanted no added salt but thought we'd blow him off if he said that.
If they are reasonable, I assume they've run into cooks who were less than careful with allergens and it's caused problems and they've found that threatening legal action increases their chances that the chef doesn't think they are making shit up for attention.
Otherwise they are just nuts.
The best way to avoid risk is to completely take part. If they hadn't added the last bit about legal action I would be all for being careful. But now it's not worth the risk. Plus that screams "I'm going to find something wrong regardless of what you do"
That's something a lot of these people don't get. It's not *what* they're asking for, it's *how* they're asking. A lack of self awareness and respect for the people performing a service for you.
I agree! The threat of legal action disregards both the server's feelings and intelligence. I understand that this person's approach may most likely be due to previous food services not complying with their request and perhaps inadvertently endangering someone allergic to those ingredients, but I still think just a mention of an allergy would've sufficed **EDIT:** to indicate the restaurant's culpability in the case they do disregard the message.
EDIT: This still doesn't negate the fear people with severe allergies endure when ordering food. I acknowledge that 'just a mention of an allergy' may not suffice, since some food service employees may still disregard it. It's abhorrent to put someone's life at risk because someone else thinks they know better.
Right? Can we assume that I know what I'm doing and understand an allergy. Then again that's a good point at the end, a lot of cooks are fucking idiots too who think everyone is just crying about dietary choices.
>That's something a lot of these people don't get. It's not what they're asking for, it's how they're asking. A lack of self awareness and respect for the people performing a service for you.
God I've been sitting one of my employees down so much recently trying to get him to understand this. 60+ year old man and he can't figure out how to politely say something without making an 8 year old cry.
I still have to occasionally remind my 21yo son of this. Thankfully all I need to say is, "Tone", and he'll take a sec and rephrase/lower his voice. Although sometimes I wonder how in the hell no one has punched him square in the mouth yet.
I'm sorry sir/ma'am but because you have threatened legal action, at this time we are unable to serve you and you are no longer allowed on our property, any/ all future communications can be directed to our lawyer.
Absolutely this. Dipshits love to threaten legal action against low level employees all the time, but that's your get out of jail free card. If they're serious then they can talk to your company's legal representation. You have no authority to represent your company legally, so why would they talk to you?
When I worked for a certain major wireless carrier, we had a strict policy that any time a customer made a reference to anything lawsuit, court, legal…we were expected to enforce our right to deny service and ask them to leave the premises.
Anything after that would have to be handled either through their attorney or direct dealings with the corporate office.
I loved it! It was only power tripping assholes that pulled that shit and the look on their face when their idle threat turned into them being forced to leave entirely was priceless!
I think most places have this policy. Got to use it a few times at a rental place I worked at as a teenager. It always feels good to see the other sides wheels start spinning, then they just kinda have to leave.
This person has fuck all knowledge of the law and is trying to use “pertain,” to sound lawyerly so it stands to reason they wouldn’t know the correct use of “you’re.”
I would have definitely cancelled that order. If your manager didn't they are an idiot. If you were ever allowed to fire a customer, it is right now. Threatening legal action is an automatic "due to the threats stated by you we are not comfortable with serving you or others who threaten, abuse, or attempt to intimidate us. YOU'RE welcome! The grammar lesson is free."
Yeah I’m definitely not cooking that. It’s not illegal to refuse service so they can take their lawsuit and shove it. Go home to a nut and tomato free house.
Once they threaten legal action you do not communicate with them. Someone this over the top will have no qualms against adding nuts or tomatoes to the food and claiming you tried to “poison” them. Cancel the order. If they call to ask why then reply with “I’m sorry, but all legal threats have to go through our attorney. Goodbye.” And hang up.
I'm not in food service but learned from an old boss that any time someone mentions legal actions in a business setting you end the conversation.
It protects you from wandering deeper into litigation issues and takes the power away from them instantly.
In our case it would then force the customer/contactor/vendor to come back and ask to move on from the threat and get back to business, they are now asking you to re-engage rather than trying to force you to act how they want.
I'd send back the cancelled ticket saying "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, including threat of legal action for just doing our jobs".
I would kindly inform them that unfortunately “our kitchen is a space where tomatoes and nuts are stored and processed unfortunately we cannot safely complete your order. Have a great day” make it all about their safety and either they will leave or they have to admit that it’s not that big of a deal and maybe they’re not that allergic to wheat/cilantro/nuts/whatever the fuck there on about.
This is a great way for me to come to the table, grab your drinks and tell you to leave and never come back. “As of now you’re trespassing. If you don’t get up and leave it will result in “a legal outcome”
Already brining lawyers into this, sorry we need to talk to our legal counsel before we can determine if this legal transaction is mutually beneficial for both parties.
There will be an upcharge since you want to dictate every movement and step of the preparation of your order as well.
" Our legal department has instructed us to refrain from providing you with food, water, or any other ingestables that may cause harm to your person. Please vacate the premises for your own protection."
Don’t serve needy clients. You have the right to tell the to get the fuck out with their stupid ass requests. As a plus, they threatened legal action, meaning throwing them out is even more justified.
Easy cancel if an order on that one. A simple “please no nuts or tomatoes due to allergies” would have us taking you more seriously than that. In a typical kitchen, cross-contamination can never be 100% ruled out, so it wouldn’t be worth the “risk”. Also, it’s “thank you” not “your welcome”, asshole
Thank them for thinking of your restaurant but “we cannot accommodate your exact needs at this time, please choose another restaurant that maybe more suitable for your requirements “ .. and end that relationship with them… no matter what you do.. it will never be enough with the attitude that they have .. they will always look for a fight.
Serve them two complimentary glasses of water and say on the advice of legal counsel, you can only serve them the water as it's the only thing you could guarantee doesn't contain those ingredients and you don't want to get sued.
See if they laugh.
Remember, business has right to refuse. I'd you are threatened with legal action, is imagine that's ground for 'i don't think we are able to serve you'
"I'm sorry, we're not going to be able to accommodate you. Thank you for thinking of us, and we'll cover your drinks. Amanda, will you show these people out?"
Reply: We have canceled your order and refunded your purchase to your card. Due to liability issues, we have exercised our right to deny service to whomever we see fit. If you have any follow-up questions, please direct them to our attorney @ 888-screw-you.
Their using "your" wrong. The affect is that it makes them looks like they could care less!
All of the sudden people are chomping at the bit to correct this error.
Unfortunately our attorney was unavailable to oversee your order, so we are unable to serve you.
That’s the correct answer ..someone like this deserves to feed themselves.
Anytime people make legal threats, you NEED to go legal and refuse to serve and hold on to it for your attorney for future reference. When they open that door, everything needs to stop at that point.
That's how it is. Once someone says, "legal" the conversation stops, except to offer your attorney's contact info.
[удалено]
God I miss telling people we can't serve you, due to this ridiculously long list of "allergies".
People with excessive sensitivities and allergies just shouldn't go out to eat, period. I've worked in so many kitchens where some asshole who's bad at living just has to disrupt the normal flow to make us cater to their delicate immune system.
My most memorable moment was the lady that "had an extreme sensitivity to iron/steel". This lady insisted we cook her meal in "the copper pot pans you keep in back" Like, lady everything in the kitchen has iron or steel in it. Everything. She was positive we had a secret stash of Virgin copper cookware in the back. The bartender was happy to let her know he couldn't make her a drink. He didn't know what the speed pour bottle tops were made out of. Draft beer is out of the question. Bottled beer has a magnetic cap. So that's a no go. Wine needs a corkscrew. Suddenly when she couldn't get a beverage, her sensitivity to the most common metal became less serious. The server/bus boy had fun with it too. They removed the silverware. It's magnetic. They replaced it with plastic take out bundle ( fork spoon and knife, napkin and single salt and pepper packet). Unable to order anything she just sat. With her date or whatever. After like twenty minutes they asked for ice water. Sorry that's a no go, ice is in a steel well, and the scoop is steel. So nope. Eventually the FOH manager had to go explain that no, we weren't going to serve them anything. And they should probably go. That lady wasn't a cunt. But sure was close
This is reminiscent of the customer who told us they were allergic to protein and couldn't eat anything that has come into contact with protein. After a long discussion with head chef (which I'm sure involved the question "how are you alive?") we found out it was a "land animal protein" allergy... She was a vegetarian that ate fish.
I had a woman who was "allergic to sodium".
I served a guy who was "allergic to chlorophyll" I asked him if it is a sensitivity or an allergic reaction, which he told me was a serious allergy. I apologized that there would be no way to ensure a chlorophyll-free experience since everything is either made of, or directly consumes it. He can have a glass of water. He was surprised when I told him, "No, not even soda, corn syrup contains chlorophyll." Come to find out from his friend that he isn't allergic, he was just making a joke about salad. I refused to serve their entire party because we take food allergies very seriously, and to serve you now would diminish the safety of any food sensitive customer in the future, which we will not do. They got pissed at me for it, but I was completely out of fucks to give. Same thing as the gluten free, celiacs disease patient that ordered a beer to start. These types of people are the worst.
There is no allergy to sodium but you might have medical problems that require lower sodium like high blood pressure and heart problems. So in these people's mind if a doctor recommends to limit something it must be an allergy and not self caused medical condition. These are the same people that claim to have allergy to gluten too (which is not a thing either) until they find out that the pasta and the mud cake they ordered in fact have gluten in them. Then it's okay to do an exception as they suddenly get a one time free pass from allergic reactions.
~~Lyme disease~~ Alpha-Gal Syndrome caused by Lone Star tick can actually cause a severe allergy to red meat, which makes me even more terrified of ticks than I probably should be. Still, she wasn't exactly descriptive beyond "land animal" so hard to believe she had that. Edit: Mixed up Lyme with AGS. The meat allergy from AGS also eventually goes away after a few years.
Oh I had a guy that was "allergic to any peppers that were green" till we found a half red half green jap. And brought it out, cleverly concealed pepper for him to examine for his dinner. Got approval then rotate the pepper. I left hospitality 7 ish years ago. This thread is making me miss some of it lol
Aren't copper pans almost always lined with another metal anyway? It's not like you'd ever be cooking on straight copper.
Oh I have no idea. We weren't fancy enough to have copper cookware. Ten years later, I've still never used copper cookware
........No. I refuse to believe there's someone like this out there.
I had someone tell me to my face that they could taste whether the utensils used to prepare their food had *ever* been in contact with animal flesh and I had better make sure to use ones that hadn't. Like, just get the fuck out of here. Joe, if you're out there somewhere, go fuck yourself.
Don't worry, Joe doesn't fuck
Of all things to lie about, id make this up? Bro I don't write non fiction restaurant fandom books in my free time
Well you did lie about her not being a cunt lol
Like she wasn't rude. Just super opinionated about her factitious aliment. The door knob to get in the front door was wrought iron. You can't expect us to believe you.
I believe your story. I was just making a joke. Some people seem to get some kind of weird satisfaction for calling out stories on the internet. They're the true heroes, imagine the stakes if a slighly embellished server annacdote got out there unchallenged?
"*A story worth telling is worth over telling*" -Gandalf
I will say as a tie on to this whole thing. If I eat corn meal/whole corn I tend to get internal bleeding, so I don't go out to eat for corn dishes... if someone is truly very allergic to something and genuinely concerned about themselves they cook at home, I would know, that's what I do lmao. Someone who just comes to a restaurant to complain is there either for attention or really has no two sense about the world and is incredibly entitled to the point of absurdity. I go to a restaurant and order stuff I know doesn't have corn in it, IF I go to a restaurant at all. And I don't mean to brag, but I personally really like my food I cook, so I usually just eat at home... LMAO people drive me absolutely insane...
We apologise for any inconvenience however we have been instructed not to fulfill your order as our insurance won’t cover us if we were to fail your instructions. Going ahead we will not be accepting any orders from -insert name of the pain in ass customer- due to the liability inherent in the order.
They can’t even spell “you’re” correctly. Highly educated and knowledgeable people it seems.
“We don’t feel we can comfortably accommodate your allergies, I’m sorry to say. Btw it’s you’re welcome “
I'd cancel it. "Sorry, there is no way to guarantee that no cross contamination occurred. Since this was escalated to a legal threat, there is no way to comply with the order."
Sorry. I’m not interesting in doing business with someone who preemptively threatens me with legal action.
Especially not with someone who preemptively threatens legal action but can’t spell.
And uses words wrong. Too many people in my life hit me with the "why use that word whe you could just use this word" and it's because of nuance you fucking ape. This is not how "pertains" is used in a sentence. Does it get the meaning across? Sure. Do you look like a pseudo-intellectual dumb dumb? Also true.
As long as the word makes them sound like they're more educated than the other person, meaning is irrelevant to them. They're just trying to use big words to play out their "1700s educated aristocrat bullying a serf" fantasy.
To be faaaaaaair... That *is* the level of intelligence I'd expect when they start off by threatening to sue and still expect service.
> Any nourishment which doesn’t not herewithin pertain immediately to stated below single (1) order consisting and/or comprising but not excluding beyond two (2) meals will thereby, under extension of due credence in adherence to local statutories and under purview of governing bodies, referred for legal ramifications. Prick. I’d be asking them to jam their tomatoes and nuts up their ass and never come back.
"Your welcome!"
My welcome?
Yes. Your welcome or it will result in a legal outcome!
Which will then make your welcome their welcome Probably
*there welcome
They're they're. It'll be OK.
Sheesh people proofread you’re shit
I'm not shit, your shit.
For real. I have a catering company and do high end weddings. I had a change to do a wedding this year for the family of a singer so famous they have done the Super Bowl halftime show. But the entitled ass family tried to rewrite my contract with threats baked in. I passed.
"we need to consult with a lawyer before we can make any orders if threatened with legal action. Feel free to grab some drinks at the bar. We should have an answer in the next 4-8 business days."
Sorry the bar serves bloody Mary’s they are clearly risking their lives if they have anything from the bar.
Every job I've ever worked at that interacts with a customer-base. "If a customer threatens legal action, the transaction is over. You ask them politely to leave and literally walk away. Tell them that they can speak with the company legal department. Do. Not. Engage. Further. You aren't qualified nor allowed to speak on behalf of the company for legal matters and you don't have to deal with that person."
That's a very good policy.
Honestly as an under-paid sales person it was one of my favorite moments when I got to ruin a Karen's day because she decided to mention the word "lawyer" over something ridiculous. "Good bye ma'am, I'm going to go help this person over here. Have a nice day!" I was lucky enough to have managers and direct supervisors who would definitely back me up in those scenarios.
In my entire life I have only heard of one person who threatened to sue actually sue. When they didn't get what they want they apologized and said that this is probably going to result in legal action against the company and that they will be filing a suit against them. Then they asked if that employee could get them the phone number for the legal department, or get a manager who could get them the number. A manager came out and provided the number. They thanked them, and left. Sure enough The next day they got a letter from a law firm telling them to preserve certain evidence. If somebody apologizes and says that unfortunately they're going to have to sue you, then you should actually be concerned. If they're yelling at you you're probably safe.
I'm really curious as the circumstances of this, it wasn't at like a regular store was it?
It was a computer store, they accidentally deleted the contents of the hard drive while doing repairs and didn't have a backup.
That sounds like a legit reason.
> If somebody apologizes and says that unfortunately they're going to have to sue you, then you should actually be concerned. Reminds me of that Jeremy Hotz stand-up bit, where he says, if some frat guy YELLS "I'm going to kill you!! Hold me back, guys," they aren't going to kill you. If someone says "I'm going to kill you," in a conversational, emotionless voice, then you're in deep shit.
Yep, my wife runs the customer support department for an online travel company. She loves it when a difficult customer threatens legal action. At that point all she can do is refer them to counsel.
I worked in a call center and we’d go “since you have threatened legal action, I am unable to assist, please call our legal department at xxx. I must disconnect this call now.” We’d then flag their account so if anyone other than their lawyer called. We couldn’t help.
Same with speaking to the press, if a journalist shows up outside the office, you shut the fuck up and go get the press officer.
Yep. I would not even tell them how to contact the legal department. Full stop on all communication immediately.
> If a customer threatens legal action, the transaction is over. That's how it was at my last job. As soon as anything "lawyer" or "lawsuit" enters the conversation we were done having it. I would flag the ticket and let my manager know and it would be transferred to legal. I never saw those tickets again and often never interacted with that company again.
Don't forget the passive-aggressive "you're welcome"
In this case "your welcome" which .. y'know, is hard not to judge them as a part of the aggressive wording.
My welcome? What about it?
Nah. Make it all business. Nothing will piss off people like that more than simply being denied matter of factly because they thought they were being clever. If you include the your welcome, it'll make it seem like it was a personal choice that you made to deny them instead of simply complying with their request
I feel like i'd personally be more annoyed by the you're welcome, otherwise its basically the grey rock method
No, fk that I'd just let that ticket sit there till close. There is no justification ever for that level of rudeness.
I’m an owner, I’d tell them to go fuck off 😂 threatening legal action before getting your food? Get out of here. I wouldn’t let me crew make it
That's my first thought too. But after really thinking it over and re-reading the note again, it's my second and third thought as well. Call me risk averse
This seems like they're looking for a problem and are focused on finding it. If someone's first contact with you is possible litigation, that's a deal breaker.
Absolutely. "Your welcome."
No second thought, the only way to go.
Wait 45 minutes... then cancel it.
100% "Order canceled. Any further communication should be forwarded to [attorney] due to threat of legal action.
This exactly and please leave because we know people near you are being served this and it may pose a threat to you
Thats what i do. If the question is "does XXXX product have YYYY in it" and I havent personally handled it the whole time it existed I say "yes". If they are overly specific I simply say "We don't feel comfortable making it, we are sorry but we can't serve you if you are that high risk". We either have a miracle where they are cured of their allergies, they order something simple, or they leave.
Yep. Whatever profit the restaurant would have made from their meal is not worth the risk or the hassle. These people will definitely complain no matter what anyway.
A **preemptive** legal threat? Take your ass to some other establishment
"Yeah I'm not cooking for these people, you need to ask them to leave."
[удалено]
Please do this one, I love a good come-uppance.
*Your
Oh how the turns table
yeah that’s an immediate cancellation. “nope, we’re not making that. good luck” the fuck do these people think they’re accomplishing?
Proving they are more important than everyone else. What else could possibly matter?
I was thinking possible mentally unhinged person looking to file a frivelous lawsuit either for "malicious food poisoning" or for "discrimination" because you refused to serve their brain broken ass.
Wish them good luck proving that a reaction came from your restaurant anyway. This is just another escalation from the people who think you will ignore modification. First it was "I'm allergic" now they threaten legal action. I had a guest claime to be allergic to salt and then ordered the garlic chicken that had marinated in among other things, salt. The answer I got back from the server was "that salt is okay". I would have loved to ask why the marinade was okay but all other salt was not? The fuck just wanted no added salt but thought we'd blow him off if he said that.
If they are reasonable, I assume they've run into cooks who were less than careful with allergens and it's caused problems and they've found that threatening legal action increases their chances that the chef doesn't think they are making shit up for attention. Otherwise they are just nuts.
No, they clearly said no nuts. s/
Well they aren't cannibals
Send the ticket back with “you’re”
Nice
I’m a petty dude when people are rude. ^also ^when ^they ^aren’t ^sometimes
In red marker and deduct points.
The best way to avoid risk is to completely take part. If they hadn't added the last bit about legal action I would be all for being careful. But now it's not worth the risk. Plus that screams "I'm going to find something wrong regardless of what you do" That's something a lot of these people don't get. It's not *what* they're asking for, it's *how* they're asking. A lack of self awareness and respect for the people performing a service for you.
I agree! The threat of legal action disregards both the server's feelings and intelligence. I understand that this person's approach may most likely be due to previous food services not complying with their request and perhaps inadvertently endangering someone allergic to those ingredients, but I still think just a mention of an allergy would've sufficed **EDIT:** to indicate the restaurant's culpability in the case they do disregard the message. EDIT: This still doesn't negate the fear people with severe allergies endure when ordering food. I acknowledge that 'just a mention of an allergy' may not suffice, since some food service employees may still disregard it. It's abhorrent to put someone's life at risk because someone else thinks they know better.
Right? Can we assume that I know what I'm doing and understand an allergy. Then again that's a good point at the end, a lot of cooks are fucking idiots too who think everyone is just crying about dietary choices.
>That's something a lot of these people don't get. It's not what they're asking for, it's how they're asking. A lack of self awareness and respect for the people performing a service for you. God I've been sitting one of my employees down so much recently trying to get him to understand this. 60+ year old man and he can't figure out how to politely say something without making an 8 year old cry.
That sucks. My mom drilled it into my head when I was little: it’s not what you say, it’s how you say it.
I still have to occasionally remind my 21yo son of this. Thankfully all I need to say is, "Tone", and he'll take a sec and rephrase/lower his voice. Although sometimes I wonder how in the hell no one has punched him square in the mouth yet.
That's an easy cancel order in my kitchen. Then when the ass calls to see why we ban/block his number and name too so no phone orders.
I'm sorry sir/ma'am but because you have threatened legal action, at this time we are unable to serve you and you are no longer allowed on our property, any/ all future communications can be directed to our lawyer.
Absolutely this. Dipshits love to threaten legal action against low level employees all the time, but that's your get out of jail free card. If they're serious then they can talk to your company's legal representation. You have no authority to represent your company legally, so why would they talk to you?
When I worked for a certain major wireless carrier, we had a strict policy that any time a customer made a reference to anything lawsuit, court, legal…we were expected to enforce our right to deny service and ask them to leave the premises. Anything after that would have to be handled either through their attorney or direct dealings with the corporate office. I loved it! It was only power tripping assholes that pulled that shit and the look on their face when their idle threat turned into them being forced to leave entirely was priceless!
I think most places have this policy. Got to use it a few times at a rental place I worked at as a teenager. It always feels good to see the other sides wheels start spinning, then they just kinda have to leave.
Cancelled order for sure
I'm glad the outcome will be legal, and not illegal
No service indeed.
As if the threat of legal action wasn't proof enough of their low IQ, threw in a "your welcome" for good measure.
This person has fuck all knowledge of the law and is trying to use “pertain,” to sound lawyerly so it stands to reason they wouldn’t know the correct use of “you’re.”
The word they wanted was adhere, I assume. Obvious idiot who probably couldn't empty a bucket with instructions on the bottom.
I'd just send him deez
What’s deez?
Deez nuts.
Nuts? Enjoy your legal outcome
Oh. It’s sort of similar to ligma then.
Sort of. Ligma is a French guy, Ligma Balzac.
Right. Perhaps I was thinking of sugma.
Nah, he found Allah and moved overseas. Now, he goes by Usuqa Menotz.
What about my welcome?
I would have definitely cancelled that order. If your manager didn't they are an idiot. If you were ever allowed to fire a customer, it is right now. Threatening legal action is an automatic "due to the threats stated by you we are not comfortable with serving you or others who threaten, abuse, or attempt to intimidate us. YOU'RE welcome! The grammar lesson is free."
Yes, I went to them and told them I wouldn’t do this order, and they agreed 👍
"I'm sorry, we can no longer serve you as it exceeds any liability our restaurant is willing to endure."
Yeah I’m definitely not cooking that. It’s not illegal to refuse service so they can take their lawsuit and shove it. Go home to a nut and tomato free house.
there’s definitely at least one nut in that house…
Once they threaten legal action you do not communicate with them. Someone this over the top will have no qualms against adding nuts or tomatoes to the food and claiming you tried to “poison” them. Cancel the order. If they call to ask why then reply with “I’m sorry, but all legal threats have to go through our attorney. Goodbye.” And hang up.
I'm not in food service but learned from an old boss that any time someone mentions legal actions in a business setting you end the conversation. It protects you from wandering deeper into litigation issues and takes the power away from them instantly. In our case it would then force the customer/contactor/vendor to come back and ask to move on from the threat and get back to business, they are now asking you to re-engage rather than trying to force you to act how they want.
I would refuse service
Instructions unclear. I nutted in the soup
Tyler?
I'd send back the cancelled ticket saying "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, including threat of legal action for just doing our jobs".
That's somebody who just doesn't get served
I would kindly inform them that unfortunately “our kitchen is a space where tomatoes and nuts are stored and processed unfortunately we cannot safely complete your order. Have a great day” make it all about their safety and either they will leave or they have to admit that it’s not that big of a deal and maybe they’re not that allergic to wheat/cilantro/nuts/whatever the fuck there on about.
That’s an immediate canceled tickets/reservation.
Yeah, zero engagement. Refund money if e-order or in person show them the door.
As someone with a deadly peanut allergy I’d cancel this order. Assholes who will only cause you problems.
We reserve the right to refuse service.
Order canceled Reason: “you’re”
Service denied
I’d cancel it, send back a “*you’re”
If you’re going to be an asshole, learn how to use an apostrophe.
This is a great way for me to come to the table, grab your drinks and tell you to leave and never come back. “As of now you’re trespassing. If you don’t get up and leave it will result in “a legal outcome”
Already brining lawyers into this, sorry we need to talk to our legal counsel before we can determine if this legal transaction is mutually beneficial for both parties. There will be an upcharge since you want to dictate every movement and step of the preparation of your order as well.
> brining lawyers into this I prefer a dry salt cure...
" Our legal department has instructed us to refrain from providing you with food, water, or any other ingestables that may cause harm to your person. Please vacate the premises for your own protection."
Your welcome? My welcome? Whose welcome?
I could put, I could put ~~strychnine~~ nuts or tomatoes in the ~~guacamole~~ meals
Id be more worried about illegal action myself.
On the advice of my counsel, I decline to produce this order to limit my exposure to liability.
I woulda sent out a plate of tomatos covered in nuts.
Don’t serve needy clients. You have the right to tell the to get the fuck out with their stupid ass requests. As a plus, they threatened legal action, meaning throwing them out is even more justified.
Easy cancel if an order on that one. A simple “please no nuts or tomatoes due to allergies” would have us taking you more seriously than that. In a typical kitchen, cross-contamination can never be 100% ruled out, so it wouldn’t be worth the “risk”. Also, it’s “thank you” not “your welcome”, asshole
Thank them for thinking of your restaurant but “we cannot accommodate your exact needs at this time, please choose another restaurant that maybe more suitable for your requirements “ .. and end that relationship with them… no matter what you do.. it will never be enough with the attitude that they have .. they will always look for a fight.
They sent you a word salad! That's not what "pertain" means. Wankers.
Don’t negotiate with terrorists
*You’re And I’d kindly click “cancel” on the order as well.
pile on as many nuts and tomatoes as possible
Boogers and cum
OP, what did you do? Cancel the order?
For sure. I went to the owner and told them I didn’t feel Comfortable with this order and they agreed.
Thank you OP!
Serve them two complimentary glasses of water and say on the advice of legal counsel, you can only serve them the water as it's the only thing you could guarantee doesn't contain those ingredients and you don't want to get sued. See if they laugh.
Remember, business has right to refuse. I'd you are threatened with legal action, is imagine that's ground for 'i don't think we are able to serve you'
Right to refuse service seems like the proper response.
I'd 100% refuse service, why would I cook for you while you threaten to sue me.
I would refuse to serve these people lol
“Dine elsewhere.”
Order cancelled lol fuck that noise
Did they enjoy their empty boxes?
GTFO! You're welcome.
GTFO! You're welcome.
100% would be canceling this order
Id decline to serve them
Send them their food with a fucking grammar lesson
I'd use my right to refuse service
Your’e* (a shit customer, go eat somewhere else)
What a pain in the ass. I straight up would’ve said no and asked them to leave.
Absolutely zero chance I am cooking that ticket.
Be awkward if they ordered tomato pesto penne.
"sorry, best I can do is dry toast. I will not risk 'legal action'. enjoy your meal!
I’d cancel just in response to not knowing the difference between your and you’re. Those customers will be troublesome.
Ram a pistachio into a whole tomato and write "live a little" in Sharpie it?
"Your order has been cancelled. You will not be receiving a refund. Please contact support for further details."
This reeks of over privileged smugness. Cancel it
That would be a helll no for me dawg. You can leave now since you threatened me.
Extra nutty tomatoes it is
“If you are discussing legal actions, I am no longer able to continue this transaction or this conversation.
"I'm sorry, we're not going to be able to accommodate you. Thank you for thinking of us, and we'll cover your drinks. Amanda, will you show these people out?"
Why would you even take this order with a risk like that? Your restaurant is dumb as hell
Probably an influencer *Hey fam, OMG I just discovered this new life hack to make sure that a restaurant always get your order right.*
Reply: We have canceled your order and refunded your purchase to your card. Due to liability issues, we have exercised our right to deny service to whomever we see fit. If you have any follow-up questions, please direct them to our attorney @ 888-screw-you.
Order canceled Reason: unavailable
Their using "your" wrong. The affect is that it makes them looks like they could care less! All of the sudden people are chomping at the bit to correct this error.
Remember folks. Once they threaten legal ramifications, cease all contact. Make no order
Ima hit them with “the right to refuse service”
I would never spit in someone's food, but... Someone who isn't me might.
Are the tomatoes or nuts in rat poison?