A US lawyer has reported a Chinese restaurant to "the authorities" and demanded damages after
accidentally being overcharged $4.
Ben Edelman, a Harvard law graduate and an associate professor at Harvard Business School, ordered a takeaway from the Massachusetts branch of the Sichuan Garden restaurant. He thought it would cost $53.35, but when he inspected his bill he found to his horror that he had been charged $57.35. That's a $4 gulf.
When Edelman emailed the family-run eatery to complain, owner Ran Duan apologised and explained that their web menu was out of date. Edelman responded withgrace statute:
However Edelman subsequently rebuffed Duan's offer of a refund, claiming that it would be "an exceptionally light sanction". He went on to explain that he had "referred this matter to applicable authorities in order to attempt to compel your restaurant to identify all customers affected and to provide refunds to all of them". The baffled restauranter replied, "you seem like a smart man, but is this really worth your time?" Apparently it was, because Edelman carried on like the biggest bore in the tutorial for some time.
When the correspondence leaked out and Edelman was accused by the entire internet of being a prize tool, he apologised. "It's clear that I was very much out of line", he said. "I have reached out to Ran and will apologise to him personally as well", though when he does he probably shouldn't accept the dumplings with special sauce.
Tip Off ROF
Ben Edelman, a Harvard law graduate and an associate professor at Harvard Business School, ordered a takeaway from the Massachusetts branch of the Sichuan Garden restaurant. He thought it would cost $53.35, but when he inspected his bill he found to his horror that he had been charged $57.35. That's a $4 gulf.
Edelman contemplates the greatest injustice of our time |
When Edelman emailed the family-run eatery to complain, owner Ran Duan apologised and explained that their web menu was out of date. Edelman responded with
However Edelman subsequently rebuffed Duan's offer of a refund, claiming that it would be "an exceptionally light sanction". He went on to explain that he had "referred this matter to applicable authorities in order to attempt to compel your restaurant to identify all customers affected and to provide refunds to all of them". The baffled restauranter replied, "you seem like a smart man, but is this really worth your time?" Apparently it was, because Edelman carried on like the biggest bore in the tutorial for some time.
When the correspondence leaked out and Edelman was accused by the entire internet of being a prize tool, he apologised. "It's clear that I was very much out of line", he said. "I have reached out to Ran and will apologise to him personally as well", though when he does he probably shouldn't accept the dumplings with special sauce.
Have your say. The RollOnFriday Firm of Year 2015 survey is now open, and so is the survey for in-house lawyers. |
Comments
107
98
114
114
94
109
124
115
116
100
102
123
101
100
104
122
132
84
123
92
119
95
120
102
105
120
118
110
112
115
119
113