returning an entree

[sp1187]

This past weekend my wife and I went to dinner at a local restaurant.

When we arrived they were not very busy.

The front of house service was very good.

The appetizers were very good.

The salads were very good.

The entrees were terrible.

The wife ordered surf & turf. The fillet was ordered medium rare.

It was served medium-medium well & the shrimp were over cooked.

I ordered the sauteed trout with a roasted red pepper risotto.

The risotto was way overdone to the point of being like paste.

The fish was served skin on and was plated over the risotto, so that even if the skin had been crisp, it wasn't when it was served.

We informed the waitress of our displeasure. She sent the manager over.

The manager asked what could she do to make it right. At this point we didn't want to wait for them to redo it, so she offered desert.

Desert was very good.

Now heres my problem, when we received the bill, we weren't charged for the $6 desert but were charged for the $27 for the surf and turf and $18 for the trout.

Is this common policy?

[SauceRobert]

This past weekend my wife and I went to dinner at a local restaurant.

When we arrived they were not very busy.

The front of house service was very good.

The appetizers were very good.

The salads were very good.

The entrees were terrible.

The wife ordered surf & turf. The fillet was ordered medium rare.

It was served medium-medium well & the shrimp were over cooked.

I ordered the sauteed trout with a roasted red pepper risotto.

The risotto was way overdone to the point of being like paste.

The fish was served skin on and was plated over the risotto, so that even if the skin had been crisp, it wasn't when it was served.

We informed the waitress of our displeasure. She sent the manager over.

The manager asked what could she do to make it right. At this point we didn't want to wait for them to redo it, so she offered desert.

Desert was very good.

Now heres my problem, when we received the bill, we weren't charged for the $6 desert but were charged for the $27 for the surf and turf and $18 for the trout.

Is this common policy?

←

Its common to do in a place that doesn't realize that their clients wont come back just for that little dessert. It is terrible customer service. One question, did you eat the entrees? If so they probably thought you were just trying to get a free meal (its not that uncommon of a thing to see).

[sp1187]

The wife ate 2 bites of the turf and half a shrimp.

I ate 2 bites of the risotto and 2 bites of the trout.

Everything was ordered alle carte, so the apps and salads were paid for seperate from the entree.

[BeeZee]

Wow, I think the manager missed the mark, big time. She saw 2 bites (a taste?) taken from the entrees which you then stopped eating. So essentially at least 3/4 of your entree was sent back to the kitchen. I certainly don't think that sounds like you were angling for a free meal and she should have had enough business sense to give you more than a $8 (?) dessert against $45 of inedible entrees. Even a gift certificate for that amount for a future visit would have been smarter.

[Eatmywords]

I don’t think so. Half the restaurants would go out of business with this thinking. I’ve worked in many, the norm, if you don’t like it you have the right to send it back and have it prepared the way you like or exchange it for another entrée (and pay its price in exchange) but not completely cancel the course. If you ordered entrees you’re expected to pay for entrees. I think that's fare.

[Jaymes]

I don’t think so.  Half the restaurants would go out of business with this thinking.  I’ve worked in many, the norm, if you don’t like it you have the right to send it back and have it prepared the way you like or exchange it for another entrée (and pay its price in exchange) but not completely cancel the course.  If you ordered entrees you’re expected to pay for entrees.  I think that's fare.

←

This has been my experience as well. If I take a bite or two and feel it's been so poorly prepared that I can't possibly enjoy it, I would send it back, but would order something else in its place.

I suppose if I were in a huge hurry, like late for a play or something, and didn't have time to wait for something else, I might refuse to pay, but I'd expect that might result in an unpleasant argument, and that's not something I'd do unless I had no other option.

[Kajikit]

This past weekend my wife and I went to dinner at a local restaurant.

When we arrived they were not very busy.

The front of house service was very good.

The appetizers were very good.

The salads were very good.

The entrees were terrible.

The wife ordered surf & turf. The fillet was ordered medium rare.

It was served medium-medium well & the shrimp were over cooked.

I ordered the sauteed trout with a roasted red pepper risotto.

The risotto was way overdone to the point of being like paste.

The fish was served skin on and was plated over the risotto, so that even if the skin had been crisp, it wasn't when it was served.

We informed the waitress of our displeasure. She sent the manager over.

The manager asked what could she do to make it right. At this point we didn't want to wait for them to redo it, so she offered desert.

Desert was very good.

Now heres my problem, when we received the bill, we weren't charged for the $6 desert but were charged for the $27 for the surf and turf and $18 for the trout.

Is this common policy?

←

I'm sorry... if the food is bad enough that I have to send it back to the kitchen uneaten, there is no way in Hades I'm going to pay for it! I'll pay for everything else we ate and drank at that meal (and if I'm hungry enough to order a substitute dish, I'll happily pay for that), but I'm not paying for food that was inedible. The few times we've returned food it's been taken off the bill without our having to say anything more about it.

[SusanGiff]

Exactly. We've done this both ways--asked for another entree, or just said, 'no thanks, let's forget it'--and in both cases the entrees have been taken off the bill. That seems proper policy to me.

[PopsicleToze]

Exactly. We've done this both ways--asked for another entree, or just said, 'no thanks, let's forget it'--and in both cases the entrees have been taken off the bill. That seems proper policy to me.

←

Me, too. In the rare instances when I had to send something back, it was always my choice to opt for another entree or to just forget it.

[sp1187]

If you ordered entrees you’re expected to pay for entrees. I think that's fare.

so I don't get what I ordered, and then I have to sit around and wait and hope they get it right the second time.

  I don’t think so. Half the restaurants would go out of business with this thinking.

if they can't get it right then they should go out of business. it's a service oriented business, especially with the economy being what it is.

I had told the wife we would come back and give them another try. after I got the bill, I said not a chance. so now they've lost repeat business along with friends and family I've enlightened.

[sickchangeup]

So wait did you expect to pay for the dessert and not the entrees? And did she immediately clear your plates away, or leave them for you to finish? If she left them, and you agreed to have a free dessert brought, then I'm with her on this one. If you had replied "You know what, we don't have the time for another entree to be brought out, can we just have the bill?" then there is no way she could have charged you for the entrees.

(BTW, I am assuming this isn't a hoity toity Michellin place, and just a regular restaurant when i say what I say).

[sp1187]

Plates were immediately cleared, and I told her we weren't interested in waiting for them to fire two more entrees. I was going to buy desert.

No it wasn't a Michellin, (do they have those in the states?), but I guess I was expecting more from a Chef out of one of M. Ruhlman's books who is also an instructor at the local college.

Anyways, thanks for all your points of views.

[JeanneCake]

I'm sorry, I can't help myself based on what I've been reading on the other thread about saying something or not.....

What did you do about the tip? Did you tip the wait staff on the total amount of the bill (regardless of whether they should have taken off the $45 in entrees or not)?

On the other hand, they asked what they could do to make it right. You said that there wasn't time to do it again, but you did have time to eat dessert. Did you ask them at the time to take the entrees off your bill? Or was that just your expectation it would be removed and you would not be charged? (I'm not trying to flame, just trying to understand).

So the difference between what dessert cost ($12?) and what the entrees came to ($45) is $32? I wonder if you had said to charge you for dessert but not for the entrees, what their response would have been.

[sp1187]

JeanneCake,

the tip was 20% on the total bill, as ordered, which is what I would have tipped even if they had deducted the entrees. the server was very good, not her fault the kitchen staff wasn't capable of cooking the menu.

we had time for the desert because all they had to do was plate it.

and yes I made the mistake of assuming they would take it off the bill. I guess that comes from lesser restaurants making things right, again in my opinion, with out being asked.

I guess I'm looking at what I consider their bigger picture, I now won't return, and my friends and family, who were likely to, won't be going there either.

[LaneL]

I would have to say that if you had clearly only tasted your food before complaining, that the manager should have taken them off your bill when you declined to have your plates remade or changed. I don't think that this practice is limited only to lesser restaurants. I also completely disagree with eatmywords because if a place cant afford to remake a plate that was not up to the customers satisfaction they have no place being open.

[sickchangeup]

Plates were immediately cleared

←

If that happened I would not have paid for the entrees. That stinks, at any joint.

[K8memphis]

I would have just *kindly bitched about it and the server would have had it removed or then I'd escalate to speak to the manager again.

*Smiling slightly I'd say, "The entrees are on my bill?" (like you're kidding me right?)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I hate it when I'm out with friends or a business meal and we get some kind of lousy service or food. I hate to have that ruin our great evening of conversation and fun because I don't want to have to focus and make decisions on random awfulness. I let it go and call back which is not plan A but... So I suck it up and they hear about it later. Unless it's inedible.

The other night we were out at Benihana's (my girlfriend's choice) and my entree was finally served after my husband was finished eating his entree--we both had chicken--wha-at?

The waitress' demeanor was like a strict school mistress and we'd all been bad. We sat waiting for the cook for over 30 minutes after water soup and weird lumpy salad dressing salad. The cook loudly dropped and splatted his fricken spatula in my plate of food.

After starters my food was Ok to good to edible. The lobster and scallops that others ordered had to be rubber--they were on the grill way too long.

So I called back later that week and asked for a manager--could he call me back--ok--nobody called--I called, "Can I talk to the manager please?"--yes she says but she hung up on me--could have been by accident--called back and she answered simply "Please hold" over and over because by now my blood was boiling.

When I did finally get the manager--he got my message. I don't want a coupon, I don't want a free entree I just wanna let you know blablabla.

We used to give places a second chance--but not so much anymore.

That was awful.

The manager was great when I finally got past the gatekeeper.--But, dude, I get better service and food at my favorite places where they don't even seat you, you just go sit down somewhere. That was some pure BS.

Edited March 10, 2009 by K8memphis (log)

[JoRic]

You most definitely should not have been charged. The only time I have ever refused to take back and not charge for an order was the person who wanted to send back their BLT because it had bacon in it. Not kidding.

[petite tête de chou]

Hmm. If I don't like what I've been given and send it back and receive something I *do* like, yeah, I should pay. But I wouldn't turn down a comp, mind.

If I don't like what I've been given and send it back with only a few bites removed and opt to not get anything else for whatever reason...well, I shouldn't have to pay. -sigh- I just feel uncomfortable not paying for something unless it's like, a fly-in-my-soup type of thing. I want to get what I ordered, pay for it and leave. A completely useless post, but there it is.

[JeanneCake]

Well, I'm still kind of confused.

When the manager who wants to make things right asks what the customer wants, I think it was appropriate for the diner to say "no, we don't have time for the meals to be redone, but if you could just bring the check that would fine."

I think the manager would have removed the entrees then.

But the manager wants to make things right, so she pushes on in that effort and offers dessert, which is accepted. From the manager's perspective, she found something the customer agrees to to make it right (giving the customer dessert and comping it). Why would they comp both the entree and the dessert?

Sometimes you have to ask for what you want and not guess that the other person knows what that is.

[Eatmywords]

Plates were immediately cleared, and I told her we weren't interested in waiting for them to fire two more entrees. I was going to buy desert.

Anyways, thanks for all your points of views.

←

Had you stipulated this in the original post my comment would have been different. I was under the impression you complaiined but kept them. If they cleared the plates and left you nothing to eat than I agree with your position for the most part. If they left the plates and you didn’t reiterate that you’re not eating either dish and want/don't want something else than I would take blame for not making it “more” clear. Also, the idea that you were in a rush is put off by accepting dessert. How do you know how long it would have taken to get out new entrees? Just about any kitchen prioritizes for mistakes. It seems like you were angry they screwed them up to begin with (which you have every right) and/or you weren’t that hungry anymore or you would have been more open to new dishes, explained you're in a rush, inquired on prep time, etc.

I would also say that the manner in which situations like these are treated vary drastically by say, type of restaurant (chain vs private) and location/region (type of clientelle) to name just a couple.

[Just Jim]

Well, I'm still kind of confused.

When the manager who wants to make things right asks what the customer wants, I think it was appropriate for the diner to say "no, we don't have time for the meals to be redone, but if you could just bring the check that would fine."

I think the manager would have removed the entrees then.

But the manager wants to make things right, so she pushes on in that effort and offers dessert, which is accepted.  From the manager's perspective, she found something the customer agrees to to make it right (giving the customer dessert and comping it).  Why would they comp both the entree and the dessert?

Sometimes you have to ask for what you want and not guess that the other person knows what that is.

←

No.

There should be no expectation on either side that a free dessert of lesser value compensates for an entree.

Simply put, the entree wasn't acceptable, and should not be charged to the customer, and the customer should have the expectation that this is how the situation will be handled.

The comp'd dessert would be a good tool to rebuild goodwill, in the hopes that the customer would return.

It is not a substitute for an unacceptable entree.

Management dropped the ball, and they have lost a customer.

[sp1187]

Why would they comp both the entree and the dessert?

Now I'm confused. For them to have comped the entrees wouldn't I have to actually eaten more then a couple of bites. I assumed, as Jim put it, the comped desert, as in 1, for 2 unacceptable entrees was a goodwill gesture. (See what happens when I break dad's rule#1("Michael, don't assume anything.")

Also, the idea that you were in a rush is put off by accepting dessert. How do you know how long it would have taken to get out new entrees? Just about any kitchen prioritizes for mistakes. It seems like you were angry they screwed them up to begin with (which you have every right) and/or you weren’t that hungry anymore or you would have been more open to new dishes, explained you're in a rush, inquired on prep time, etc.

I didn't say we were in a rush. I said we weren't interested in them redoing the dishes. If they scewed up both dishes when they weren't that busy,and now they are really busy, what expectation would I have of them getting it right the second time? I didn't want a rush job risotto. I wasn't angry that they screwed the dishes, I was disappointed, which is exactly how I put it to the waitress and then the manager. I was angry when I got the bill. Did I say anything? Nope. Should I have said something? Some nights I can be confrontational, others, not so much. That night I lost $45 dollars, less a "comped" desert, and they lost my repeat business, and that of my brother and friends who had them on their list of places to eat. No winners, disappointment all around.

I have a question for those of you in the know...do restaurants generally premake or make to order their risooto?

[blizzard854]

I think that risotto is usually par-cooked before service, and finished off on an as ordered basis... at least that's what i've read...

I think management should have had the sense to comp the entrees at least; rather then the dessert.

I had a similar incident occur to me when a friend of mine ordered a burger that was studded with a spicy pepper (this wasn't indicated on the menu, and my friend couldn't really handle spicy food), they still charged us for the burger (only about 2 or 3 bites were taken out of it.) Even after complaining they only comped her soda. Let's just say it was quite upsetting, and I haven't gone back since; and it was a place I use to frequent on a weekly basis.

[saltshaker]

From a restaurateur perspective, the manager flat out dropped the ball. You never should have been charged for the entrees, regardless of whether she offered you something extra. Many's the time over my years in the busiiness that I've comped an entire meal when someone is truly unhappy with their food or service - that's good business, and unlike someone suggested above, it's not remotely likely to put us out of business - it's far more likely to result in a return visit from that customer, and good things said. That restaurant is lucky that the original poster hasn't posted the name of the restaurant here and elsewhere along with the story.