We deliver your food in thirty minutes or it's yours, free of charge.
This is a pretty standard guarantee given by fastfood joints to people who have food delivered to their homes or offices. One of the twentieth century's most novel concepts, fastfood delivery is manna from heaven for those putting in extra hours at work or are too tired to whip up something to eat at home. It may be hell on your health, but it's also a hell of a convenience.
In all my years of fastfood delivery experience (always on the receiving end, of course), I've never been able to partake of a free meal resulting from the breach of the delivered-in-thirty-minutes-or-it's-free guarantee.
Until last night.
Last night we ordered food from Shakey's, and as is customary, they asked that we synchronize our time with theirs. According to them, the order was placed at 6:26 p.m., and they promised delivery in thirty minutes or we wouldn't have to pay for it.
Not that we thought there was a chance they wouldn't deliver our dinner in time. The nearest Shakey's-- a newly-opened branch located near the corner of UN Avenue and Orosa St.-- is a short five-minute walk from the Court. It was unlikely they'd be late.
But lo and behold, a little over thirty minutes later (just before 7 p.m.), our chicken, mojos, and pizza were nowhere to be found. Since the others were busy editing our weekend press releases, I was tasked to: (1) find out where our goddamned food was, and (2) remind them that per their guarantee, our dinner would be on them.
I called the Shakey's hotline and told the operator that our dinner wasn't there yet, and that since more than thirty minutes had passed since we placed our order we wouldn't be paying for it. The operator then politely replied that yes, we placed our order at 6:26 p.m., but it was relayed to the designated branch at 6:35 p.m., hence the cut-off time would be 7:05 p.m., not 6:56 p.m.
That was crap, I incredulously replied. First of all, I said, "you guys asked us to synchronize our watches to 6:26 p.m., the understanding being that the thirty-minute guarantee began once the order was taken." Nothing was said about the reference point for the time guarantee being the time the order was relayed to the branch responsible for the delivery. If that was so, I added, then "you should have said so, and then asked the branch in question to call and tell us what time they got our order."
By this time my blood started to boil. As courteous as the Shakey's person on the other end of the line was, I couldn't help thinking that they were trying to bullshit their way into not honoring their guarantee.
As we were discussing this, my officemate informed me that it was past 7:05 p.m. That rendered our previous discussion moot. I told the operator what time it was, and informed her that even if we followed her (flawed) reasoning and based the cut-off on 6:35, they still failed to deliver on time.
At this point the operator probably sensed I wouldn't give in. So she told me that the manager of the Orosa Branch would call to clarify the matter. As if on cue, the delivery guy from Shakey's arrived, and had this worried look on his face when we informed him we wouldn't pay the bill. So we called the branch up and informed the manager that we had no intention of paying them.
Thankfully, she didn't protest, and apologized for the delay. Seems that their branch was full that night, and consequently their delivery service (as my officemate put it) "suffered from their own success."
So, the whole episode ended happily ever after (especially for our OIC, who had offered to treat those of us doing OT). To the credit of Shakey's, they did honor their guarantee. Still, I wonder what would have happened had they delivered our dinner after 6:56 p.m. (our cut-off time) and before 7:05 p.m. (their cut-off time). I think they would have still argued their case. I also think they would failed to get a centavo. Attys. Guerra, Angeles, and Erni v. Shakey's Orosa?
No contest.
This is a pretty standard guarantee given by fastfood joints to people who have food delivered to their homes or offices. One of the twentieth century's most novel concepts, fastfood delivery is manna from heaven for those putting in extra hours at work or are too tired to whip up something to eat at home. It may be hell on your health, but it's also a hell of a convenience.
In all my years of fastfood delivery experience (always on the receiving end, of course), I've never been able to partake of a free meal resulting from the breach of the delivered-in-thirty-minutes-or-it's-free guarantee.
Until last night.
Last night we ordered food from Shakey's, and as is customary, they asked that we synchronize our time with theirs. According to them, the order was placed at 6:26 p.m., and they promised delivery in thirty minutes or we wouldn't have to pay for it.
Not that we thought there was a chance they wouldn't deliver our dinner in time. The nearest Shakey's-- a newly-opened branch located near the corner of UN Avenue and Orosa St.-- is a short five-minute walk from the Court. It was unlikely they'd be late.
But lo and behold, a little over thirty minutes later (just before 7 p.m.), our chicken, mojos, and pizza were nowhere to be found. Since the others were busy editing our weekend press releases, I was tasked to: (1) find out where our goddamned food was, and (2) remind them that per their guarantee, our dinner would be on them.
I called the Shakey's hotline and told the operator that our dinner wasn't there yet, and that since more than thirty minutes had passed since we placed our order we wouldn't be paying for it. The operator then politely replied that yes, we placed our order at 6:26 p.m., but it was relayed to the designated branch at 6:35 p.m., hence the cut-off time would be 7:05 p.m., not 6:56 p.m.
That was crap, I incredulously replied. First of all, I said, "you guys asked us to synchronize our watches to 6:26 p.m., the understanding being that the thirty-minute guarantee began once the order was taken." Nothing was said about the reference point for the time guarantee being the time the order was relayed to the branch responsible for the delivery. If that was so, I added, then "you should have said so, and then asked the branch in question to call and tell us what time they got our order."
By this time my blood started to boil. As courteous as the Shakey's person on the other end of the line was, I couldn't help thinking that they were trying to bullshit their way into not honoring their guarantee.
As we were discussing this, my officemate informed me that it was past 7:05 p.m. That rendered our previous discussion moot. I told the operator what time it was, and informed her that even if we followed her (flawed) reasoning and based the cut-off on 6:35, they still failed to deliver on time.
At this point the operator probably sensed I wouldn't give in. So she told me that the manager of the Orosa Branch would call to clarify the matter. As if on cue, the delivery guy from Shakey's arrived, and had this worried look on his face when we informed him we wouldn't pay the bill. So we called the branch up and informed the manager that we had no intention of paying them.
Thankfully, she didn't protest, and apologized for the delay. Seems that their branch was full that night, and consequently their delivery service (as my officemate put it) "suffered from their own success."
So, the whole episode ended happily ever after (especially for our OIC, who had offered to treat those of us doing OT). To the credit of Shakey's, they did honor their guarantee. Still, I wonder what would have happened had they delivered our dinner after 6:56 p.m. (our cut-off time) and before 7:05 p.m. (their cut-off time). I think they would have still argued their case. I also think they would failed to get a centavo. Attys. Guerra, Angeles, and Erni v. Shakey's Orosa?
No contest.
No comments:
Post a Comment