Starbucks to be sued by customer...
Discussion
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1252283/Fa...
While I agree a public place has some duty of care over the customers, I really don't see how they can always take 100% responsibility over every single aspect.
When out in public, you need to be vigilant.
What gets me is...
"'This is not about compensation, this is about preventing such a thing happening to another family.'"
So why are you suing them then? Make it public, bring it to the press, hell - go on TV if possible, but how will suing them prevent such a thing from taking place again?
While I agree a public place has some duty of care over the customers, I really don't see how they can always take 100% responsibility over every single aspect.
When out in public, you need to be vigilant.
What gets me is...
"'This is not about compensation, this is about preventing such a thing happening to another family.'"
So why are you suing them then? Make it public, bring it to the press, hell - go on TV if possible, but how will suing them prevent such a thing from taking place again?
andy400 said:
The only viable reason for suing Starbucks would be that they sell incredibly s
t 'coffee' at massively inflated prices.
Are you sure they sell coffee? I've only been in one once but gave up trying to work out what you have to say to the robots behind the counter to get a simple cup of coffee and haven't been back since.
t 'coffee' at massively inflated prices.As long as starbucks have a policy for thoroughly cleaning the place throughout the day I think they have done all they could. If the needle was dropped 2 days ago and wasn't cleaned up they would have been neglidgent. It could have been dropped seconds before in which case it was impossible to prevent. However, if there is a known problem of junkies shooting things into their veins in the place then I think they have a higher duty of care to make sure there are no needles about or that the junkies arent allowed in.
If they do clean regularly then it would seem to be one of those unfortunace rare situations that seem to present themselves in life.
If they do clean regularly then it would seem to be one of those unfortunace rare situations that seem to present themselves in life.
OnTheOverrun said:
andy400 said:
The only viable reason for suing Starbucks would be that they sell incredibly s
t 'coffee' at massively inflated prices.
Are you sure they sell coffee? I've only been in one once but gave up trying to work out what you have to say to the robots behind the counter to get a simple cup of coffee and haven't been back since.
t 'coffee' at massively inflated prices.
Hence the inverted commas.Nothing sold in those places even closely resembles what I would reasonably call 'coffee'.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff






Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.