3 ms·

Do yourself a favour and actually read about that incident.

by whycome 1y ago

TiredOfLife 1y ago
I have read about it and still can't see how mcdonalds lost.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- hansvm 1y ago
  McDonald's was negligent. The coffee was hot enough to cause immediate lasting damage, having it that hot didn't benefit any party involved, reducing the temperature would have fixed the problem, been as simple as turning a knob, and increased customer satisfaction, and they knew about the dangers and repeatedly chose to do literally nothing about it. If you tweak elements of the case then you can imagine the restaurant winning. As it stands, it's not surprising McDonald's lost.
  - grues-dinner 1y ago
    And they apparently didn't even learn all that much: literally this week, but with hot chocolate and an 8-year old: https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/young-girl-suffers-severe-burns-10354085 https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/young-girl-s... Maybe this time they won't go on a PR campaign against the victim (it's also the UK where you only get real damages, so they probably won't care enough, no million pound lawsuits here even if it was as serious as the original case, which it isn't). There's definitely a balance between hot drink being hot and absolutely scalding, especially when you know you're going to be handing it into a vehicle from a window. And it's not an especially onerous thing to turn the temperature down, and as you say, no one likes getting 98 degree paper cup of lava that you can't even sip for 10 minutes. They say they did control the temperature, so maybe it's indeed all on the customers, but I do know I have been given some really hot hot drinks in paper cups that seem excessive.
  - potato3732842 1y ago
    Not just negligent, chronically negligent to the point that a court hit the "fuck you fix it" button (punitive damages). They had all the chances in the world to turn down the heat, use better cups, etc, etc, after any one of the prior accidents. They didn't, they just kept paying the settlements and the lawsuits, until someone got hurt so badly that the court said enough is enough. It's a textbook perfect example of how punitive damages are supposed to work.
  - SoftTalker 1y ago
    Coffee is supposed to be hot! McDonalds now serves tepid dishwater instead of coffee.
    - hansvm 1y ago
      They serve coffee, still hotter than most establishments, certainly hotter than most people prefer. You can't drink it at the previous temperatures, even after waiting 10 minutes. What are you trying to prove?
  - Ajedi32 1y ago
    > knew about the dangers and repeatedly chose to do literally nothing about it The dangers of... hot coffee? Yeah, everyone knows that. That's exactly why they shouldn't have lost to the extent that they did. It's tragic for the person involved obviously; I get why emotionally the court would feel sympathy for the victim. But objectively speaking its pretty ridiculous for the legal system to be awarding punitive damages for companies exposing people to normal, reasonable risks that everyone encounters as part of everyday life. It creates a culture where businesses have to treat grown adults like children for fear of huge fines if something goes wrong. At worst McDonald's was probably like 10% responsible for the incident but they got treated like they were 100,000% responsible. (The jury actually did find the woman was partially responsible, it was the judge that decided on the absurd damages amount. It later got reduced and settled out of court so all in all I think the system ultimately worked okay despite the judge's ridiculous initial decision.) Edit: I misread, it was actually the jury that made the initial ridiculous punitive damages ruling, the judge was the one who reduced it later before it got settled out of court for an undisclosed (possibly still ridiculously high) amount.
    - D-Coder 1y ago
      > The dangers of... hot coffee? I don't expect hot coffee to put me in the hospital needing skin grafts.
      - Ajedi32 1y ago
        It can and will if you spill enough of it in the wrong place, regardless of whether it was made by McDonald's or an electric kettle. This is true of any hot beverage or even soup.
        D-Coder 1y ago
        Depends on the temperature. If I had burned myself 500 times, I think I'd learn and turn down the temperature. Note that both customers and store managers had complained many times.
    - fgbarben 1y ago

Do yourself a favour and actually read about that incident.

TiredOfLife 1y ago

I have read about it and still can't see how mcdonalds lost.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
hansvm 1y ago
McDonald's was negligent. The coffee was hot enough to cause immediate lasting damage, having it that hot didn't benefit any party involved, reducing the temperature would have fixed the problem, been as simple as turning a knob, and increased customer satisfaction, and they knew about the dangers and repeatedly chose to do literally nothing about it. If you tweak elements of the case then you can imagine the restaurant winning. As it stands, it's not surprising McDonald's lost.
- grues-dinner 1y ago
  And they apparently didn't even learn all that much: literally this week, but with hot chocolate and an 8-year old: https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/young-girl-suffers-severe-burns-10354085 https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/young-girl-s... Maybe this time they won't go on a PR campaign against the victim (it's also the UK where you only get real damages, so they probably won't care enough, no million pound lawsuits here even if it was as serious as the original case, which it isn't). There's definitely a balance between hot drink being hot and absolutely scalding, especially when you know you're going to be handing it into a vehicle from a window. And it's not an especially onerous thing to turn the temperature down, and as you say, no one likes getting 98 degree paper cup of lava that you can't even sip for 10 minutes. They say they did control the temperature, so maybe it's indeed all on the customers, but I do know I have been given some really hot hot drinks in paper cups that seem excessive.
- potato3732842 1y ago
  Not just negligent, chronically negligent to the point that a court hit the "fuck you fix it" button (punitive damages). They had all the chances in the world to turn down the heat, use better cups, etc, etc, after any one of the prior accidents. They didn't, they just kept paying the settlements and the lawsuits, until someone got hurt so badly that the court said enough is enough. It's a textbook perfect example of how punitive damages are supposed to work.
- SoftTalker 1y ago
  Coffee is supposed to be hot! McDonalds now serves tepid dishwater instead of coffee.
  - hansvm 1y ago
    They serve coffee, still hotter than most establishments, certainly hotter than most people prefer. You can't drink it at the previous temperatures, even after waiting 10 minutes. What are you trying to prove?
- Ajedi32 1y ago
  > knew about the dangers and repeatedly chose to do literally nothing about it The dangers of... hot coffee? Yeah, everyone knows that. That's exactly why they shouldn't have lost to the extent that they did. It's tragic for the person involved obviously; I get why emotionally the court would feel sympathy for the victim. But objectively speaking its pretty ridiculous for the legal system to be awarding punitive damages for companies exposing people to normal, reasonable risks that everyone encounters as part of everyday life. It creates a culture where businesses have to treat grown adults like children for fear of huge fines if something goes wrong. At worst McDonald's was probably like 10% responsible for the incident but they got treated like they were 100,000% responsible. (The jury actually did find the woman was partially responsible, it was the judge that decided on the absurd damages amount. It later got reduced and settled out of court so all in all I think the system ultimately worked okay despite the judge's ridiculous initial decision.) Edit: I misread, it was actually the jury that made the initial ridiculous punitive damages ruling, the judge was the one who reduced it later before it got settled out of court for an undisclosed (possibly still ridiculously high) amount.
  - D-Coder 1y ago
    > The dangers of... hot coffee? I don't expect hot coffee to put me in the hospital needing skin grafts.
    - Ajedi32 1y ago
      It can and will if you spill enough of it in the wrong place, regardless of whether it was made by McDonald's or an electric kettle. This is true of any hot beverage or even soup.
      - D-Coder 1y ago
        Depends on the temperature. If I had burned myself 500 times, I think I'd learn and turn down the temperature. Note that both customers and store managers had complained many times.
  - fgbarben 1y ago