Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most of us were not aware of the facts. This happens too often when we rely on blurbs in the media and don't research the facts. And politicians using the misfortune of this woman to promote their own agenda is disgusting.
Actually, the facts have been around for a very long time. It's why I laugh at people who use the story as some sort of "evidence". It doesn't matter, the damage is done, thanks to the media being a bunch of sensationalists instead of factual reporters.
I'm sorry but when I buy a cup of coffee I fully expect it to be hot. I expect that it will be hot enough to burn me. I don't take the lid off the cup. I tear a small hole in the lid. I feel bad that the woman was burned so badly, but she did it to herself. I don't need a chain saw company to install a dull chain in case I lack the sense to not put a running machine on my lap.
I'm sorry but when I buy a cup of coffee I fully expect it to be hot. I expect that it will be hot enough to burn me. I don't take the lid off the cup. I tear a small hole in the lid. I feel bad that the woman was burned so badly, but she did it to herself. I don't need a chain saw company to install a dull chain in case I lack the sense to not put a running machine on my lap.
The coffee was hotter than you might expect to get out of your coffee maker. A coffee maker will make coffee that's about 130-140 degrees f. McDonald's was serving theirs at 190 degrees f. Hot enough to cause severe third-degree burns.
Yes, the coffee was too hot for consumption. Not merely too hot for spilling, but too hot for drinking. You'd burn your mouth drinking it that hot.
If she had burned her mouth, I could totally see that McD's should have paid immediately the damages when she initially asked for them, and McD's should've gotten taken to the cleaners if they refused and ended up in court over it.
However, that isn't what happened.
The customer bought what she knew would be hot coffee. She knew that hot coffee is hot, she knew that if it spilled, it would hurt. Maybe she wasn't expecting burns, but she had to have known that it would at -least- cause some discomfort. Just knowing that little about the hot coffee that she intentionally purchased - should've been a tip-off that it's a really stupid idea to place the cup between your legs in a car where you can't jump up if something goes wrong, and pull the lid off the cup.
Just that one thing alone - her actions - tells me that McD's was not responsible, at all, even remotely, for her burns. She was 100% responsible for them.
The lawsuit was used to change the rules for McD's..and I get that. They should lower the temperature of their coffee, it was too hot to drink, and drinking is the intended result of selling coffee there.
She should've gotten no money for medical expenses - she brought that on all by herself. I would've awarded her a few thousand bucks as a reward to thank her for bringing the matter up and forcing McD's to lower the temps of their coffee, to ensure that customers don't burn their mouths when they do with the coffee, what McD's expects customers to do with it - which is drink it.
If she had been sitting at a table, she would've been able to jump up, and thus avoid all the 3rd degree burns (which occurred because she was stuck in a bucket seat of a car unable to get the sweatpants away from her skin). 2nd degree burns don't cost $10,000 and a week's hospital stay, so she would've avoided most of her medical expenses.
So - I'm in agreement that McD's coffee needed to have a lower temp. But I don't agree that it needed to be lowered in order to avoid 3rd degree burns on crotches of customers who choose to place the cups between their legs in parked cars and peel the lids off. That is the choice of the customer.
The facts proven in the case were that McDonald's had exhibited callous, wanton, and reckless disregard for the safety of its customers. .
Not proven at all. The fact is that their coffee temp was the same as industry standards and a miniscule number of people got burned. Unfortunately, accidents happen. If a large number of people are injured, then maybe the business is irresponsible. But when a handful out of billions and billions of customers are burned, then it's just unfortunate. And when an old person gets burned, the results are catastrophic. That doesn't change the facts.
My biggest problem with this case is that the lawyers are the winners.
I'm sorry but when I buy a cup of coffee I fully expect it to be hot. I expect that it will be hot enough to burn me. I don't take the lid off the cup. I tear a small hole in the lid. I feel bad that the woman was burned so badly, but she did it to herself. I don't need a chain saw company to install a dull chain in case I lack the sense to not put a running machine on my lap.
Exactly.
Everyone knows that fast food outlet coffee is very hot and has been for decades.
Yes, the coffee was too hot for consumption. Not merely too hot for spilling, but too hot for drinking. You'd burn your mouth drinking it that hot.
If she had burned her mouth, I could totally see that McD's should have paid immediately the damages when she initially asked for them, and McD's should've gotten taken to the cleaners if they refused and ended up in court over it.
However, that isn't what happened.
The customer bought what she knew would be hot coffee. She knew that hot coffee is hot, she knew that if it spilled, it would hurt. Maybe she wasn't expecting burns, but she had to have known that it would at -least- cause some discomfort. Just knowing that little about the hot coffee that she intentionally purchased - should've been a tip-off that it's a really stupid idea to place the cup between your legs in a car where you can't jump up if something goes wrong, and pull the lid off the cup.
Just that one thing alone - her actions - tells me that McD's was not responsible, at all, even remotely, for her burns. She was 100% responsible for them.
The lawsuit was used to change the rules for McD's..and I get that. They should lower the temperature of their coffee, it was too hot to drink, and drinking is the intended result of selling coffee there.
She should've gotten no money for medical expenses - she brought that on all by herself. I would've awarded her a few thousand bucks as a reward to thank her for bringing the matter up and forcing McD's to lower the temps of their coffee, to ensure that customers don't burn their mouths when they do with the coffee, what McD's expects customers to do with it - which is drink it.
If she had been sitting at a table, she would've been able to jump up, and thus avoid all the 3rd degree burns (which occurred because she was stuck in a bucket seat of a car unable to get the sweatpants away from her skin). 2nd degree burns don't cost $10,000 and a week's hospital stay, so she would've avoided most of her medical expenses.
So - I'm in agreement that McD's coffee needed to have a lower temp. But I don't agree that it needed to be lowered in order to avoid 3rd degree burns on crotches of customers who choose to place the cups between their legs in parked cars and peel the lids off. That is the choice of the customer.
That sums it up for me too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
Not proven at all. The fact is that their coffee temp was the same as industry standards and a miniscule number of people got burned. Unfortunately, accidents happen. If a large number of people are injured, then maybe the business is irresponsible. But when a handful out of billions and billions of customers are burned, then it's just unfortunate. And when an old person gets burned, the results are catastrophic. That doesn't change the facts.
My biggest problem with this case is that the lawyers are the winners.
What was proven is that people feel bad for little old ladies. It will be interesting to see how the most recent case plays out. My guess is that McDs settles because the lid was loose. I don't necessarily buy that no one would help the woman or even call 911 for her. I also question why she wandered around and didn't go to the hospital immediately or call 911 for herself. What kind of help did she expect from McDs' employees?
Frivolous lawsuits are a real problem in this country, but this was not one of them even if McDonalds successfully painted it that way in the court of public opinion.
There is no reason that coffee has to be served hot enough to strip paint with.
McDonald's served their coffee at temperatues 20-30 degrees hotter than other fast food outlets. Their corporate mandated and enforced serving temperature was 50 degrees higher than recommended by burn institutes. While they knew how to make safer ones, they served drive-thru customers using the same flimsy styrofoam containers and plastic lids used for inside customers. They gave drive-thru customers small containers of cream and sugar to be added to the coffee. This foreseeably requires opening the container. The flimsy containers mean foreseeable spills. The ridiculous temperatures mean foreseeable third-degree burns, even if McDonald's hadn't already had 700 other burn cases in their files that they had paid a half million dollars and more to keep out of court. Failure to take reasonable steps to prevent a foreseeable injury to others is the definition of negligence. Ms. Liebeck was using the product as intended and foreseeably received third-degreee burns. McDonald's got off easy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
