« University president objects to paper's Pillow Talk column | Main | Man who stole 136 vehicles just liked to drive »
Jury sides with unhappy diner who refused to pay his bill
Ralph Paul was unhappy with his seafood dish and refused to pay for it. After being charged with defrauding the restaurant, he hired a high-priced lawyer to fight the $46 matter. The case went to trial and he won. (St. Petersburg Times)
October 5, 2006 | Permalink
Comments
I wonder: did the jury get to break for lunch or dinner?
Posted by: kam | Oct 5, 2006 8:47:10 AM
What a tool!
He didn't get his way so he also didn't pay for his companion's meal, the coffee or dessert, and seems to have stiffed the server as well.
I was taught that if a patron eats more than 1/4 of a meal without sending it back or pointing out a problem, that they are responsible for paying for it. (and it sounds as if he had) I was told that was a law but don't really know.
Perhaps the menu did not describe the item adequately but that is no excuse.
Posted by: Stan Flouride | Oct 5, 2006 8:55:59 AM
my defrauding a diner story:
We had been seated by the hostess who took our drink order, we had a small dinner order so she took that too and brought us our drinks.
45 minutes past. We asked about the food and she'd forgotten to put it in. We had the food delivered to go because it was late, and a manager was working the register. I asked if we could get anything knocked off since we had to wait so long. She said no, we had gotten our food, we had to pay for it.
I asked why we had to wait 45 minutes. She said it was because we had given our order to the hostess and not a waitress. I asked if it was normally a 45+ minute wait to sent a waitress to our table because that hadn't even happened. She refused to budge so i took my food. Grabbed a bottle of ketchup off one of the tables and walked out without paying.
Next time i was in there she didn't mention it.
Posted by: boynamedsue | Oct 5, 2006 9:00:33 AM
This guy's girlfriend must be proud of him. The "code" he lives by is to be a difficult ass.
Posted by: oxhead | Oct 5, 2006 9:25:40 AM
The Code of the Small Shrimp...small shrimp...is that like a tall giant?
Posted by: Rusty | Oct 5, 2006 9:47:33 AM
What a douchebag. $15.99 sounds like a reasonable price for that dish as described.
Posted by: | Oct 5, 2006 9:49:44 AM
I'm gonna try this at Denny's...
Posted by: Rusty | Oct 5, 2006 10:38:06 AM
If he was so willing to pay for what he and his girlfriend ate, why didn't he just leave the money for what he felt was fair on the table when he left? What a wuss to stiff an American business and its employees then try excuse his behavior by using his military service. He'll probably try the same tactic with his high priced New York attorney; "I'm a veteran so I should get a 80% discount."
Posted by: Tuck | Oct 5, 2006 11:11:16 AM
Yeah, that's what our soldiers fight and die for. The freedom to be a complete ass in public and in front of your girlfriend.
What a moron.
Posted by: Jim | Oct 5, 2006 11:16:10 AM
Let us do the math. The $500.00 an hour attorney is in court 7 hours, he's from New York so presumably he flew to Florida ($1000.00). He probably spent about 20 minutes preparing for trial, but billed at least 3 hours, another 4 hours for $120.00 an hour paralegal. I might be missing something here too so this is a low ball.
$6,480.00 might seem expensive for a dinner out - but my friends that's the price one has to pay when one lives by a code.
Posted by: JDubs | Oct 5, 2006 11:39:28 AM
Jim, you said what I wanted to say but even better.
And I never read in any book by Fodor's or Frommer's about world travel that you don't pay anything for a meal you don't like. Or for the meal your girlfriend completely ate. I think that kind of behavior would get you in a heap o' trouble in any country.
I do feel sorry for the jury foreman: Stacie Dull. Not a dazzling name, that.
Posted by: Swangirl | Oct 5, 2006 12:07:39 PM
This happens more often than you might think. But since I work occasionally for a corporation, I just get the manager to comp it and it's over with. Or they order another dish (which they pay for) and, hopefully, enjoy it.
Once a guy went ballistic on me because there was cabbage in his Caesar salad (the Caesar mix consisted of romaine lettuce and red cabbage). "It wasn't listed on the menu." "You're right, sir, it wasn't, but I'm afraid we don't have any romaine that isn't mixed in with cabbage." Then he told me that he ordered the same dish in one of the chain restaurants in California and there was no red cabbage in the romaine mix -- a blatant lie; it's a corporation, they're known for making everything exactly the same, no matter where you go.
My manager at the time was always bitching that servers overreacted to customer complaints. "They're always perfectly nice when I come to the table." So I just said, "Travis, there's a man at table 33 who isn't very happy with his shrimp Caesar salad." About ten minutes later, Travis came back in the kitchen and said, "what a fucking asshole." It was priceless.
Posted by: Ambs | Oct 5, 2006 12:33:39 PM
This guy is a clown. He ate all the seafood, then wanted more? I seriously doubt they teach one in the Air Force to be a jerkoff. Surely there's some sort of "restaurant blacklist" that they could put this moron on, so that he gets crappy service whereever he goes.
Posted by: pnwgal | Oct 5, 2006 12:39:12 PM
i call shannigans. he didn't learn of this 'code' in the air force ... this guy's been an asshole his whole life.
Posted by: lester | Oct 5, 2006 12:47:35 PM
Unfortunately, pnwgal, being associated with the military gives me the perspective that the guy IS a jerkoff, if he's a retired LtCol. They're called "Lite Birds" for a reason. He either didn't have enough clout or enough brains to pass the promotion boards to colonel.
Two promotions up from Lite Bird and you're a one-star general.
It's been my experience that there are two kinds of "retired" officers: happy, because they left on their own, and ticked off, because they were forced to go. The AF is currently shucking off useless officers left and right.
Posted by: Soo | Oct 5, 2006 12:48:38 PM
I wish there were such a blacklist, pnwgal. I can't begin to tell you how many times I've had to return a 3/4-eaten steak that the customer suddenly decided wasn't up to their standards ... but they had to eat most of it to be absolutely sure. Even though I asked them to cut into it and make sure it was cooked properly when I dropped it off at the table. This guy seems cut from the same mold. He ate all his shrimp and scallops out of his pasta and demanded more seafood.
Posted by: Ambs | Oct 5, 2006 1:04:39 PM
He may have a code, but I wish he also had manners. If he wasn't pleased with the misrepresentation all he needed to do was quietly explain to the server that the meal wasn't what he thought it would be and ask for a different entree or for more seafood.
Most restaurants would be more than happy to add a few more shrimp and scallops, they stay in business by keeping the customer satified.
Posted by: David | Oct 5, 2006 1:34:53 PM
I never write on here but I read it often. I must say that I felt so embarrarrsed reading this. I could just feel my cheecks getting red. I would have been so ashamed to say that that guy was my boyfriend. His act was so unclassy. Goodness, to be seen with such a cheapskate. If he wanted a ton of seafood he should have went buffett.
Posted by: doozer | Oct 5, 2006 1:42:13 PM
I was just sitting here thinking of that guy and I thought of that old Simpsons episode where Homer goes to the all you can eat seafood place. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Homer take it to court too? LOL, sorry just sort of like this I guess!
Posted by: doozer | Oct 5, 2006 1:50:38 PM
Well, Homer paid for ALL YOU CAN EAT, and thus had a valid case.
Plus, he had a better lawyer.
Posted by: SwarthyTroll | Oct 5, 2006 2:10:40 PM
Soo is right about the AF rank. I am pretty sure this guy is a non combatant officer who ran into his glass ceiling as a Lt. Col. That seems to be the defining rank, you either stop there and are discharged or you are promoted to full Colonel. Many administrative and support officers leave as Lt. Colonels and thats OK, they served and they went as far as the could. This guy seems to be a prissy little pain the ass, quick to invoke his service. I live down the street from a great guy who is very personable and semi-retired, does a lot of volunteer work. He lived her for years before any knew that he was as highly decorated jet jockey from the Vietnam era, who was an ace, who was shot down and rescued from enemy country. I am pretty sure his code would not have him stiff a server or a restaurant in the name of some mythical code. A lot of paper officers are like this guy, pretty tough on the enlisted ranks and the little people who work for them. Guess that carried over into civilian life What a nub!
Posted by: TomW | Oct 5, 2006 4:21:49 PM
I don't think it's a LAW that you don't have to pay if you're dissatisfied. A decent restaurant would remove the cost of an entree from a dissatisfied customer's tab, but come on-- this is just theft.
Posted by: Miles Aje | Oct 5, 2006 4:33:28 PM
Did none of you read the article?
"Paul asked the waitress if he should have gotten more shrimp and scallops. The chef said he got exactly what went into every Verdura, a popular item at the restaurant.
Paul sent the dish back and asked that it be removed from his bill. He ordered dessert and coffee.
When the bill arrived, the Verdura was still on there.
Soon, Paul was in an argument with the restaurant's manager and owner. They wanted him to pay for the entire entree. Paul said he would pay to cover only the seafood he ate, not the vegetables and pasta.
The restaurant refused, so he left. Later, Paul asked the Better Business Bureau to mediate. But the restaurant, which has received no other complaints with the BBB in the past three years, would not do that."
He offered to pay for the meal minus the dish, he offered to pay for the meal with the dish PRORATED for the portion he ate, and offered to have the BBB mediate. I think he took it to a ridiculous extreme, but it's not like he didn't offer. When the guy complained, they should've informed him that they used the same amount of seaafood they normally do, and then offered him an extra seafood portion just to make him happy. The guy could've ended it by paying $16, but the restaurant could've settled it with $3-4 worth of seafood.
Posted by: Booger Presley | Oct 5, 2006 5:25:55 PM
No, we read the article, Booger. But he ate all the seafood off his plate and THEN asked if maybe he shouldn't have more. How is the restaurant supposed to know they shorted him if, in fact, they did? As far as they knew, he had the appropriate amount of seafood ... and it could have been more than the five shrimp and five scallops he says were on the plate. There's no proof of that except for his testimony.
That being said, most restaurants out there will take an item off the bill if you ask them to. I think everyone involved was overreacting.
Posted by: Ambs | Oct 5, 2006 7:00:48 PM
"he lives by a code"
The guy sounds like Larry David. I could see this as an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm. Larry pays a $500/hr lawyer in a lawsuit over a $46 meal. Plus, there's a shrimp angle.
Posted by: Foo | Oct 5, 2006 7:02:16 PM
