Thread: Customer seeks $1.5 million from McDonald's after request for more napkins is snubbed

Webster Lucas only wanted a Quarter Pounder Deluxe at a Pacoima, Calif., McDonald’s on Jan. 29. Oh, and how about a few extra napkins?
Lucas has filed suit against the fast-food franchise, seeking $1.5 million for emotional distress after he says he received a single napkin with his order.
He claims the McDonald’s manager refused the request and offered something else.
The manager allegedly told Lucas he already had received additional napkins. According to TMZ.com, Lucas alleges the manager then mumbled a racist comment, saying, "something about 'you people'."
TMZ said Lucas, who is African-American, complained to a company general manager and claimed he couldn't work because of the "undue mental anguish" brought about by the incident.
Lucas said he was offered only a few free burgers in return.


Read more at Jacksonville.com: Customer seeks $1.5 million from McDonald's after request for more napkins is snubbed | jacksonville.com

Originally Posted by Necron99

Lucas said he was offered only a few free burgers in return.

should of taken them 'cause now he'll get zip

He should be charged for all/any costs to the government or McD's over this frivolous bullshit.

tsk tsk tsk, those bloody people.

Shoot him, and charge his sleazebag lawyer for the bullet.

Hang on, fellas. We don't know the full story here.

Webster may be a fine individual and have a perfectly valid point. Let's not rush to judge too early...

Are McDonalds obliged by law to give out extra free stuff? Nope. It will be at the discretion of the server or the manager.

"You kinda people" could simply be a comment about whinging needy people.

Remember that stupid bint that sued them because she took hot coffee in her car and spilt it on herself? Won half a mill if I remember but they overturned it on appeal.

trying to win the lottery using their IQ as their lucky number

Originally Posted by Necron99

Lucas said he was offered only a few free burgers in return.

priceless

Originally Posted by Necron99

...
Lucas said he was offered only a few free burgers in return.

But no extra napkins. Poor thing, I can see why he deserves $1.5m.

I'd give him a heavy boot to the face.

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

Hang on, fellas. We don't know the full story here.

Webster may be a fine individual and have a perfectly valid point. Let's not rush to judge too early...

$1.5m for no extra napkins after he already had extras...no, I'll go for the rush to judgement, though he may well be fine individual indeed.

He'll be even finer after the 'anti-racist' racists get involved and panic McD into settling. Er, for their racism.

How can it be racist ? Surely the person serving him would have been black !

the archbishop of canterbury

Webster may be a fine individual and have a perfectly valid point. Let's not rush to judge too early.

seeking $1.5 million for emotional distress after he says he received a single napkin with his order.

yes, he sounds fine to me. a perfectly balanced rational citizen with a genuine grievance.

Of course, many of us live in a country where the 'napkins' are toilet paper- but the toilets have none. Who should we sue?

Originally Posted by malcy

How can it be racist ? Surely the person serving him would have been black

He should be counter-sued for causing distress to the employees

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Remember that stupid bint that sued them because she took hot coffee in her car and spilt it on herself? Won half a mill if I remember but they overturned it on appeal.

There's more to that story. She was awarded punitive damages, with the intent to punish that particular McDonald's, not to reward her. That McDonald's had been warned previously about the excessive temperature of their coffee. She was in the drive thru and put the coffee in her lap, where it spilled and severely burned her genitals.

I'm not saying it's right, but the American judicial system is pretty litigious.

Originally Posted by War Elephant

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Remember that stupid bint that sued them because she took hot coffee in her car and spilt it on herself? Won half a mill if I remember but they overturned it on appeal.

There's more to that story. She was awarded punitive damages, with the intent to punish that particular McDonald's, not to reward her. That McDonald's had been warned previously about the excessive temperature of their coffee. She was in the drive thru and put the coffee in her lap, where it spilled and severely burned her genitals.

I'm not saying it's right, but the American judicial system is pretty litigious.

She put a cup of coffee in her lap and spilt it, and needed medical treatment because it was hot?

They should have given the stupid bitch a lobotomy and some ECT while they were at it.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by War Elephant

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Remember that stupid bint that sued them because she took hot coffee in her car and spilt it on herself? Won half a mill if I remember but they overturned it on appeal.

There's more to that story. She was awarded punitive damages, with the intent to punish that particular McDonald's, not to reward her. That McDonald's had been warned previously about the excessive temperature of their coffee. She was in the drive thru and put the coffee in her lap, where it spilled and severely burned her genitals.

I'm not saying it's right, but the American judicial system is pretty litigious.

She put a cup of coffee in her lap and spilt it, and needed medical treatment because it was hot?

They should have given the stupid bitch a lobotomy and some ECT while they were at it.

Look man, everyone knows it's bullshit, but that's the way things work in the US courts. It's always more complicated than it seems, and you should look at that story and immediately see how McDonald's could possibly be partially at fault for creating a hazardous condition. If you own a business in the US, anything that could potentially harm your customers or employees has to be taken very seriously because the consumer has all the power and if you cause injury the consequences for your business can be severe. Yes, some stupid bullshit like this happens every once in a while, but it's also nice to know that as a consumer, I'm protected, have recourse, and guarantees mean something. And she was legitimately injured, and McDonald's rejected the first (and smaller) settlement offer.

Originally Posted by Koojo

Originally Posted by hazz

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Remember that stupid bint that sued them because she took hot coffee in her car and spilt it on herself? Won half a mill if I remember but they overturned it on appeal.

The poor lass got 16% third degree burns that required skin grafts, at the same time macdonalds chose to keep their coffee some 10-15C hotter than home brewers to maintain higher shelf for the pot of coffer. the unfortunately this causes third degree in 5-7 seconds rather than 20-30 seconds. its equivelent of the difference between a cat hitting someone at 30 or 40 mph. a small difference in impact, massive difference in the effect on people.

What the coperate echo chamber managed to do was spend millions to spin the case into a campaign to protect coperates that knowing harm their customers. A stunningly successful campaign that managed to sucker you harry.

Give me a break, she still put a cup of hot coffee between her legs in a car I assume she was driving.
Stupid twat.

When I was a kid we didn't need to be warned about the obvious. We weren't complete retards back then.

A woman sued and won after slipping on a drink that was on the floor even though the store pointed out she had thrown it over her boy friend seconds earlier.

Unfortunately we live in a world of retards, and for some reason nature is not allowed to take its course.