RE: [CH] There ought to be a law
Mary & Riley (uGuys@ChileGarden.com)
Fri, 30 Mar 2001 16:26:45 -0800
> I suspect that a large chain like chile's doesn't have real
> atomic hot food
> because of the liability. People these days are lawsuit happy and
> I wouldn't
> doubt that someone would try to sue them if their food was too hot. Who
I suppose pain and suffering might come into it, but there's no damage in
the first place, especially when you specifically order #10 hot on a scale
of 1 to 10, which one my favorite Thai places does. In fact they have 10+!
Haven't been there for a while, since I moved. Gotta go back. (Forget the
name, but on Whittier Blvd at Beach Bl in La Habra, CA.)
> would have beleived that you could sue because you spilled coffee in your
> lap while driving till it happened to McDonalds. The best solution is to
I thought that was ridiculous too, until I heard some details that were not
publicized probably cuz it took away from the "What?! That's nuts!"
reaction. The lady had 2nd degree burns on her where it's tender. That's
hot and that hurts and causes scaring. You wanna be scared there?
Additionally, McDonalds, it came out in court, _knew_ their coffee was
hotter than common industry practice and had had complaints and injuries
prior to this. 12 people, presumably reasonable, thought them culpable.
One needs to remember that the insurance industry has a vested interest in
making large awards look unreasonable. And some, of course, are. But many
are not, and it can be demonstrated that high rates are not a result of high
awards.
>
> > There really ought to be a law against false advertising. Anytime a
> > business raises false hopes and expectations, then mercilessly
> dashes them
> > against the rocks.
Best thing to do is tell them. If they don't fix it don't go back. Money
talks. ;-)
Chow,
Riley