Xoutpost.com

Xoutpost.com (https://xoutpost.com/forums.php)
-   The Lounge (https://xoutpost.com/off-topic/lounge/)
-   -   Not Again! (https://xoutpost.com/off-topic/lounge/24493-not-again.html)

blondboinsd 12-20-2006 12:28 PM

Not Again!
 
Starbucks sued over hot chocolate incident


An Indianapolis couple, Michael and Alexis Brennan, is suing Starbucks, claiming that they served their daughter a cup of hot chocolate, which subsequently spilled and left her with serious burns. The daughter, whose age was not given, but was young enough to fit in a car seat, was said to have been riding strapped into that car seat in the back of the car when she spilled the drink. The mother stopped the car and got out to discover that the "skin on [her] leg was falling off of her."
Starbucks is supposed to serve their kids sized drinks at about 20 degrees less than their standard temperature, putting those drinks at about 140F or so, which is hot, but not incredibly so when you consider the size of the cup and the fact that they are often topped with an inch or more of cold whipped cream, as this particular drink was. The baristas can make it at a lower temperature if requested. A high percentage of parents test the temperature of their kids' drinks by taking a sip themselves, but Ms. Brennan only subjected the drink to a visual inspection before handing it to her daughter. A small child holding a drink of any kind in the backseat of a moving car, especially if he or she is small enough to have to be confined to a car seat, sounds like a recipe for disaster, regardless of whether the drink is hot or not. The parents are, of course, seeking (unspecified) damages.

jwilburn 12-20-2006 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blondboinsd
Starbucks sued over hot chocolate incident


A high percentage of parents test the temperature of their kids' drinks by taking a sip themselves, but Ms. Brennan only subjected the drink to a visual inspection before handing it to her daughter.

Starbucks should counter sue on grounds of bad parenting.

blondboinsd 12-20-2006 12:39 PM

ROFL for sure! Reminds me of that Mcdonalds incident a long time ago

cmyX6go 12-20-2006 12:47 PM

Why should Starbucks be responsible for the mother's stupidty :confused:

jwilburn 12-20-2006 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmyX5go
Why should Starbucks be responsible for the mother's stupidty :confused:

This just in: AZ woman sues Neimans and BMW for allowing her to leave her child in the car while she shops. :rofl:

yeowzer 12-20-2006 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmyX5go
Why should Starbucks be responsible for the mother's stupidty :confused:

:iagree:

blondboinsd 12-20-2006 12:56 PM

Because people are sue happy, I would NEVER give a child a hot drink if they we're in a car seat which If I am not mistaken is NOT booster seat so they are under 4 years old?

cmyX6go 12-20-2006 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwilburn
This just in: AZ woman sues Neimans and BMW for allowing her to leave her child in the car while she shops. :rofl:

Dont get me started J - remember, I don't have kids so I can't comment on parenting techniques. :nanana:

benathon 12-20-2006 01:16 PM

People always try to find a way to sue big organizations.

X5Jay 12-20-2006 01:39 PM

Michael & Alexis need to be slapped silly...


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:10 PM.

vBulletin, Copyright 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
© 2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved.