/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>14839416
Yes, because you made the decision to order it and they only made it because you said you wanted it in the first place.

what I usually do is call their corporate HQ and complain, usually changes things by the next time im in

>>14839419
Good work satisfying your customers Mr. Service Industry, that's a great way to ensure they come back again

>>14839419
Unless of course they are somehow forcing you to eat something that they convinced you that you like and you ultimately don't want it then yea, in this case just leave.

>>14839427
I'm not Mr. Service Industry, I just think that if you made that commitment you should pay for it. You saw the menu, you read the description of the dish I'm sure. You had a basic idea of what to expect.

Only if there was something actually wrong with the dish or they made a recommendation on what you should order. If you chose something without input, it was cooked and prepared properly, and you didn't like it that's on you.

>>14839435
No, the customer ultimately decided to agree and accept the suggestion, in no way was the customer obligated to do so.

>>14839434
That's like saying you should be perfectly happy with a floppy ass McDonald's cheeseburger after seeing a plump juicy burger in a McDonald's advertisement.

>>14839442
eh, most places will swap out the item for something else if a server made a recommendation and it didn't stick

>>14839416
I think there can be something "wrong" with it while still not being made wrong. Like, if you order a reuben and their reuben comes with turkey for some unexpected reason (as the restaurant's recipe), yeah, I think it's fine to expect the restaurant to not charge you.

Same with it just being outright terrible, poorly seasoned, whatever, but not a 100% of the time thing, and the customer needs to say something real fast.

>>14839443
Yea but there is a very high chance that you either
A. Have eaten there before
B. See a customer eating something and have a basic idea of how the food is actually prepared
C. See a burger being prepared or served at the counter for someone to pick up. Even then, you should know better than to trust advertising and a valid representation of an actual food item. And if you didn't know then, you will ultimately know by this point.

>>14839447
That makes sense and that is good customer service. When restaurants do those things, it reflects positively on them.

To play devil's advocate, why is it more important to you guys that a restaurant strictly enforce the service contract instead of attempting to make an unsatisfied customer happy? If you run a restaurant, you're really more concerned with a one-time profit than ensuring your customers walk away feeling contented?

>>14839416
N

As a former server, even my manager is aware that profit margins are so low cost-per-dish that if someone didn't like what they got, told us about it, we would happily replace it and charge them for the dish they actually enjoyed. If you wait until the end of the meal and then complain, it's all on you.

>>14839462
Yes, restaurants should absolutely be doing this.

>>14839462
I took OPs question to mean that it should be policy that they do so rather than a judgement call thing.

>>14839416
if you don't like it, don't want to eat it and don't want to pay for it then let your server know as soon as you get the chance.

No. If you take a bite and it's awful complain. If it just wasn't super nummy go fuck yourself. Restaurant food must be edible, not good.

>>14839421
>corporate HQ
>Food chain

you have shit taste dirtbag

Am I the only one who really doesn't care and would just eat it and know not to order it next time?

>>14839451
I don't see this being a very high chance, but I work in what's potentially the world's biggest tourist city. Most people are unclear of what to expect. I've never been a server, but as a manager in another section of the business, and a frequent restaurant customer, even I've looked down at food that's come out and gone "huh... that's not something anyone should reasonably expect from this order."

>>14839478
It totally depends, but most of the time I do this. I don't want to wait for a lot of extra shit, like needing the whole thing to be recooked, pissing off the cook, or making my group wait for me while my meal comes back.

Also, a lot of this depends on the size of the restaurant. For a small business just getting by on some margins, I'll probably shut my ass up and consider it a loss, maybe not come back. A chain or a place doing amazing business each night? Yeah, I'm gonna bring it up.

>>14839489
In the case of a tourist city, then yes it wouldn't really apply in this situation. Still, I just don't see it as a big enough deal to make a big deal out of it. That is just me though. Learning from your mistakes is a core process that every human being shouldn't shy away from.

>>14839496
>I don't want to wait for a lot of extra shit, like needing the whole thing to be recooked, pissing off the cook, or making my group wait for me while my meal comes back.
This is mainly why I avoid it too. But I mean if you had it in your mind to try something new that you normally don't order and you end up not liking it, you shouldn't put that on the restaurant. I guess there are a lot of various reasons why a restaurant should or shouldn't reimburse, but it is always a good thing if they are willing and happily do so.

>>14839507
But it's not really your mistake when the food doesn't have pictures or whatever. This is one of those things where I think as an owner, I'd want to know which of my BOH is making bad food.

>>14839536
Yea that is true, but the menu tends to provide descriptions of the meal and unless it is in a foreign language, there are enough context clues in the menu (plate/bowl/burger/sandwich/etc) to get a basic idea of what to expect.

>>14839416
>not because there was something wrong
Then yes you have to pay for it, if there was something wrong then no you shouldn't have to pay for it.
What kind of retarded question is this?

>>14839416
if you order something and they present an honest attempt at the dish with no major flaws (raw meat etc) then you should always pay for the dish. You take on the responsibility of risk by agreeing to pay for someone else's goods, therefore you assume liability if the risk fails. If you don't want to pay for a bad dish then get meal insurance.

>>14839416
Get the fuck off this board with your relentless idiotic threads. You're worse then Jack poster

>>14839576
But this isn't really true in most consumer industries short of food. Returns exist almost everywhere, even for open packages. I can buy $200 worth of clothes, try them on, decide they suck, and bring them back for a full refund.

>>14839416
this is some double nigger scam artist shit, this is why low class places make you pay up front because scumbags always pull some bullshit like this. You should realize within the first few bite that it's not what you wanted, if you eat half the meal then try to get out of paying you're full of shit and just trying to get a free meal.

>>14839576
Do we also have to tip our meal insurance agent? Is 15% still standard? I haven't been to a restaurant in a very long time.

>>14839462
>ensuring your customers walk away feeling contented?
Fuck that, i'd ban you for life if you pulled some nonsense like that. Why would i care about return service from a person that tries to weasel out of paying? A restaurant is a business not your therapist.

>>14839416
If you send your meal back after two bites, then they shouldn't charge you. If you don't finish your meal and don't say anything well before the bill comes, that is on you.

>>14839647
I'd come back on your day off and while you're busy getting yelled at by your ugly wife with a snotty kid hanging off her tit and do it again

>>14839624
this.

>>14839600
yea because they can resell the clothes, that full dish of food goes in the trash, complete loss because didn't enjoy it as much as you hoped

>>14839600
They say "We'll sell you our interpretation of this dish, we promise it's up to base legal sellable standard. You don't get to try it before buying." And you say "Ok" when you order it from the waiter. This is the agreement you enter in almost every purchase.

>>14839679
Not true, I've worked at companies where we just have to damage the clothes out and call it a wash. People don't want to buy bathing suit bottoms or other shit that a bunch of people have put on.

They can't resell electronics either, and that shit is still actually accepted and just sent back.

>>14839684
We're basically splitting hairs. But if it comes out and your product is shit, most businesses would probably want the customer to feel better about coming back, and improve on the problem, before it starts catching up to you.

>>14839735
At the retailer i worked for every return was sent back to the company, the company then reimburses the retailer. The company usually sells the returns to wholesalers who then sell it at thrift shops, flea markets, salvation army, etc. my point is it's not a complete loss, sure they're not making profit off of it but they're not losing everything on it.

>>14839416
If I didn’t like it and didn’t take more than a couple bites of the food then I shouldn’t be charged, this only happened once in my adult life as I’m not a picky eater and it was at higher end restaurant, not sure what was going on in the kitchen that day but 50% of the tables food was basically inexcusable, I mean for christ sake how do you fuck up chicken and waffles? I thought I was safe, but it was the worst thing at the table, who drizzles balsamic glaze over fried chicken and waffles?

>>14839775
>higher end restaurant
>chicken and waffles
i'm just going to ignore the elephant in the thread.

Malt vinegar on fried chicken is very good and quite popular, maybe they were trying to make a fancy version of that by using a reduced balsamic glaze but it does sound odd with the addition of waffles. Do you think the cook just couldn't pull off a recipe that could've possible been good if made properly? Or was it just a bizarre combination of flavors?