1150
1151

[UK] Hot Coffee (2011): Fascinating look into the history of lawsuits and tort reform in the United States, starting with the infamous McDonalds coffee case. This doc is also available in the US. (netflix.com)

alexrobinhood が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]armedburrito -51ポイント-50ポイント  (23子コメント)

Time for the downvote train, again. As this comes up often.

McDonald's should not have been liable for her injury. The extent of damages has no bearing on the fact that her injury was her own fault, I don't care if her vagina melted, or at least think it has no bearing on the case.

This woman was 79 years old, so her skin was paper thin, she was wearing synthetic pants, which constricted around her after the hot coffee soaked it, and I _seriously_doubt she pulled her pants off in any 'reasonable' amount of time, considering that she was 79, and in a vehicle at the time. She perched a cup of hot liquid, between her knees, in a moving vehicle, and then removed the lid. She was 100% at fault.

There have been similar cases all over the world, including the UK, a country that relies on hot beverages, like tea. Their main battle tanks come standard issue with tea kettles, that's how much they care about their hot drinks. The lawsuits were thrown out, because the temperature of the coffee is expected to be served hot. If it's not sold hot, it will not sell as effectively, and anybody buying hot beverages really should know that coffee or tea, fresh served, is likely to be very hot.

Further evidence that this case is bullshit, even in the US? McD's didn't change a fucking thing after the lawsuit. Oh wait, they put a bigger warning on the cup. That's it. That's all they had to do to comply and preclude anymore lawsuits. Not put a new warning on the cup, not change the design of the cup, make the current warning larger.

Lawsuits like this are the reason we have retard warnings all over America. 'Do not hold wrong end of chainsaw' 'Do not use microwave for drying pets' 'Warning: This bag of peanuts contains peanuts, which are an allergen'

People often point to the extent of the damages, and the fact that she's a little old lady. It doesn't matter. She may not have deserved what happened to her, but she sure as hell earned it, and her specific vulnerabilities are not the fault of McD's, especially when it would be discrimination to not serve her, on the grounds of her age and condition.

Edit: Welp, fuck this faggot sub. People wanna argue, and spam downvotes, so I can't respond. Screw trying to be reasonable. The people upvoting this are fucking idiot hippies who bought into bullshit propaganda, and have no concept of law. Main reason people are so supportive of it is because stupid new-age hippies love to 'hate' on big corporations - sent from my iPhone, especially McD's. Same reason SuperSize Me went so well, a dude went from eating what a vegan chef often cooked to eating McD's for every meal of the day, and surprise surprise, it wasn't fucking healthy. This stupid mentality is also the reason people were able to sue McD's for being fat, because they're fucking stupid and McD's is an easy bad guy to frame.

And I reiterate, McD's still hasn't changed the serving temp of their coffee.

[–]Fsharp88 28ポイント29ポイント  (1子コメント)

Time for the downvote train, again

Edit: fuck this faggot sub

Lol

[–]kellumc13 16ポイント17ポイント  (6子コメント)

So what about the 700 complaints and the court order to lower the temp. Why were so many people complaining if it wasn't a problem? I've spilt coffe on myself and would never imagine getting third degree burns from it. McDonald's was majority at fault. That's why we have a legal system and we don't listen to random people like you.

[–]t0talnonsense 10ポイント11ポイント  (2子コメント)

You claim all these new age hippies don't know the law.

Are you a lawyer or a judge? The fact that you are saying "fuck this faggot sub," makes me think you aren't.

Because I know we talked about this case in my torts class quite a lot, and it was a pretty clear cut case. People aren't downvoting you to stifle discussion. They are downvoting you because not only are you wrong, you're being a dick in the process.

But please, continue with your victim complex, and while you're at it, get ready for the war on Christmas in a few months. You know there's nothing us liberal hippies love more than waging war on Christmas.

[–]IveGotaGoldChain 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Because I know we talked about this case in my torts class quite a lot, and it was a pretty clear cut case

I've seen this a few times on here, and it's the popular opinion so it is going to get upvoted every time, but we talked about it on my torts class and it was anything but clear. it could have went either way.

[–]aubgrad11 13ポイント14ポイント  (2子コメント)

You're not trying to be reasonable. You have zero grasp of tort law, that is why you are being downvoted. As well as spouting bullshit as fact.

[–]this_is_my_favorite 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

The vehicle was parked.

[–]inspired2apathy 10ポイント11ポイント  (3子コメント)

Read about the context. They kept it that hot because it was cheaper than making their coffee better and were repeatedly warned that it was dangerously hit. Internal documents show they considered the cost of litigation but decided to keep doing it anyway.

Have you ever tried drinking 190F water? There's absolutely no reason to serve it that hot.

[–]Rastiln 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Every time I happen to get coffee at McDonald's -

Small black coffee, and please put a scoop of ice on top so I can drink it.

[–]thesmilingmeat 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Breakfast tea is brewed at 212F and steeped for three minutes (in a pre scalded pot or cup, unless you're a savage). Served close to black, there's no way it's losing 22 degrees during that time. I'm not a coffee drinker so I have no idea what the optimum temperature for it is, but there is certainly precedent for hot drinks to be just shy of boiling.

[–]inspired2apathy 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

You'd be surprised. My kettle drops 10 degrees in about a minute. You'll lose another 15 pouring into a cup.

[–]bantership 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Reiterate all you want. Mcdonald's specifies a temperature ten degrees cooler than before the lawsuit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/28/booming/storm-still-brews-over-scalding-coffee.html?_r=1&

[–]armedburrito 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm sure it's slightly different from store to store, and if it's not served at a temperature range that could burn someone, they probably have a lot of unsatisfied customers. Many sources say the temperature hasn't changed, and is still served as an industry standard at temperatures hot enough to scald someone.