I don't know that you're supposed to feel sorry for - I feel sorry for her though. I'd feel bad for anyone that spent a week in the hospital and had to have skin grafts on their nether regions because they got some coffee at the drive thru. That would just really suck.

But it was still as a consequence of her own stupidity.

The situation evokes some measure of pity, but no genuine sympathy. And, because of goddamned Stella, I can't get a decently hot cup of coffee anywhere.

I also don't feel bad for the shithead who lost his fingers because he failed to follow the instructions for clearing clogged, wet grass from his lawnmower blade.

"Turn the fucking thing off" is not rocket science, nor is "don't stick your hand near the sharp thing."

having worked in restaurants, i happen to know WHY McDonalds coffee used to be so hot.. the hotter the water, the less grounds you need to extract the same flavor level. breing coffee at 180 deg, is a corner cutting tactic, and it bit them.....now, in order to provide the same flavor with 140 deg water, they need more grounds/cup. i dont, however think 3mil was appropriate. maybe 1/2 mil? they should have asked me.

Aside from going to McD's in the first place, I don't see what she did that was so stupid. Everyone spills their drink occasionally, that's klutz not supid isn't it?

Klutz stupid is sitting in the passenger seat with the cup of blazingly hot coffee, which is known and expected to be blazingly hot, clutched in between one's thighs.

THAT is how stella injured herself.

She might as well have sued the vehicle manufacturer over the lack of cupholders.

It WAS all Stella's fault.

The original jury award of 2.7 million in punative damages was appealed and reduced to $480,000.

No. I don't agree.

So does it follow that if it does still bug her, that the problem remains unsolved? She still feels some lingering annoyance as a result of that evening, and she too felt that his letter was an unsatisfying non-apology.

It's no matter now though... I sent an e-mail declining the passes and telling them that I'd resume my patronage at their theater, though no longer exclusively. It's basically over.
Judging by the reactions like this one, I think that I have done an inadequate job of illustrating how big an asshole Troy was that evening. I find it hard to believe that this was an isolated incident due to a bad night, because he was being so vindictive about it. He had several opportunities to resolve the situation, but instead he compounded the problem, and pursued it to the point that other people in the theater-- strangers-- were literally shouting at him to leave us alone.

Personally, I let things stew in my mind until I am satisfied with the result, or until enough time has passed that the edge has worn off. "Forgive and forget" is a nice theory, but it discourages consequences.

Imagine if you were having a pleasant evening walk with your significant other, and a well-dressed man approaches you and asks for some money. You refuse. A few minutes later, he appears from behind, and tries to make off with your wife/girlfriend's purse. After a tug-of-war, you manage to get it back. The police are nearby, and stop the perpetrator. A few minutes later, an officer comes over and says, "Well, he feels bad about what happened, and he says that if you'd only given him some money, he wouldn't have had to try to steal her purse. He doesn't understand how it got to that point. He says his wealthy father will send you $20 if you just forget the whole thing."

Would you press charges?

That's cool.

Phew!


It's interesting though, that the 'admit no liability' tactic that was just being discussed seemed to have hurt McD's in the eyes of the jurors;

"The testimony of Mr. Appleton, the McDonald's executive, didn't help the company, jurors said later. He testified that McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious burns, but hadn't consulted burn experts about it. He also testified that McDonald's had decided not to warn customers about the possibility of severe burns, even though most people wouldn't think it possible. Finally, he testified that McDonald's didn't intend to change any of its coffee policies or procedures, saying, "There are more serious dangers in restaurants."

Mr. Elliott, the juror, says he began to realize that the case was about "callous disregard for the safety of the people."
Next for the defense came P. Robert Knaff, a human-factors engineer who earned $15,000 in fees from the case and who, several jurors said later, didn't help McDonald's either. Dr. Knaff told the jury that hot-coffee burns were statistically insignificant when compared to the billion cups of coffee McDonald's sells annually.

To jurors, Dr. Knaff seemed to be saying that the graphic photos they had seen of Mrs. Liebeck's burns didn't matter because they were rare. "There was a person behind every number and I don't think the corporation was attaching enough importance to that," says juror Betty Farnham.
When the panel reached the jury room, it swiftly arrived at the conclusion that McDonald's was liable. "The facts were so overwhelmingly against the company," says Ms. Farnham. "They were not taking care of their consumers."
Then the six men and six women decided on compensatory damages of $200,000, which they reduced to $160,000 after determining that 20% of the fault belonged with Mrs. Liebeck for spilling the coffee."

http://www.vanfirm.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm

I don't think you're overreacting.

But there is one important thing to remember, which I believe I have the experience to impart, based on my 7 years of service in retail.

The employees at the theater don't care about you. They will never care about you, or your petty problems, and you can't make them. They're minumum wage workers who don't get any extra money by giving you good service. There's simply nothing in it for them. There's nothing you can do to change this.

I, of course, sympathise with you completely. But I know from experience that there are just so damned many customers, that employees typically just dehumanize them and see them as sheep.

So, I think your rage is completely justified. But realize that after a certain point, your efforts are fairly pointless.

Well then, clearly revenge is the only answer.

Determine when he's in the place, and then write another customer service letter, in an entirely different style, from someone other than you, with misspellings, a different address (use a friend's), and with a story based on the time of his shift.

Creativity is encouraged, but make it believeable.

The next reaming will be one he doesn't expect.

So... to exact my revenge upon Troy for (among other things) questioning my integrity, I should... sacrifice my integrity? I hope you were trying to use irony to make a point there, but if so, I still disagree with the point. You seem to be attaching false motives to my actions. Troy took some really nasty actions, and I want his employer to have an equal but opposite reaction. That's justice, or karma...not revenge. Some people don't make a distinction, but there is one, and it's important.

I don't want to ruin the guy's life, but I want him to face the consequences for his actions. From what I've seen, I doubt he got chewed out about this, he probably just got a mention of it from his boss. If I'm right, then perhaps providing more details to his boss would result in the justified chewing-out. If I'm wong, if he DID get chewed out, they're not going to chew him out again over the same incident.

But it sounds like you've already decided unwaveringly that I'm overreacting, based on incomplete, third-party information. And that's OK, I'll just continue to disagree. But like I said, It's over anyway.
I too have some experience in customer service, from several different jobs, and my experience has shown me that in most companies, somebody cares how the customers are treated, the trick is to find who that person is, and impart your experience to them.

So, what DO you want, HP? were you hoping we'd all just say " you did the right thing, good job" ?

What would have to happen for you to be appeased?