Starbucks responds to $5 million lawsuit from customer over latte shortage

Tip : Click on the " Xinmin Evening News " ↑ above to subscribe for free

Maybe you are still drinking Starbucks as usual today, but the recent "Starbucks dad" may be a little troubled! ~

Consumer claim: $5 million

According to court records, two California residents recently filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, accusing Starbucks of selling coffee that has not contained the content it claimed for many years .

The lawsuit stated that when consumers purchased lattes, the actual amount they received was about 25% less than the amount they should have received. This was a means used by Starbucks to save on milk costs, so Starbucks must compensate consumers a total of US$5 million .

Let me just say that 5 million US dollars is equivalent to more than 32 million RMB at the current exchange rate.

Starbucks responds: The allegations are false

Starbucks later issued a statement saying that the allegations in the lawsuit were false.

The statement said that the company is proud of its high-quality, hand-mixed drinks. Hand-mixed drinks increase the occurrence of variables , and consumers often have special requests, so the volume of drinks is generally not a problem. If a customer is not satisfied with the drink, Starbucks will be happy to redo it.

User comments:

nextgen7576: Well, sometimes it is not enough, but other coffee shops also have similar situations, the dosage is not accurate.

ZWJerry: First of all, Starbucks is not expensive in the United States. Secondly, latte is espresso with milk. If the amount is small, it can be seen at a glance. There is no need to save money.

Go up and go left: Can you tell "Ken Ken" and "Lao M" that half of the Coke is ice?

520CDJ Flame 5755945453: It's better to be self-sufficient. It's too expensive to drink, and the portion is not enough...

11 Lululu: After buying coffee, you can obviously add whole milk, 2% milk or half & half milk. I don’t think Starbucks in the United States lacks this milk.

Crazy NO123: Last time I felt the American food tasted wrong, I said something and they immediately redid it. Their service is just different~

imKoda: I feel like I missed out on several $5 million

There is no conclusion on this matter yet, but Xiaoxin thought of another "sky-high compensation case" in the United States involving consumer goods worth $5 million -

Last year, Michael Kors, a famous American fashion brand, had to settle with consumers for nearly 5 million US dollars because it was suspected of defrauding consumers in pricing.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Southern California consumers Theresa Gardinella and Christina Langeyer. Gardinella bought a pair of jeans with a "manufacturer suggested retail price" of $120 for $79.99 at an MK outlet store near Los Angeles.

The price seemed to be one-third cheaper, but after careful investigation, Jia Di Nella found that the jeans had never been sold in retail stores. The two plaintiffs believed that MK had deceived consumers by making up price tags to give them the impression of a big discount, so they took the famous fashion brand to court.

The two parties later reached a settlement in a Manhattan court. Although Michael Kors did not admit any wrongdoing, it was willing to settle with consumers for $4.88 million , and consumers who purchased "discounted" products from July 25, 2010 to July 25, 2014 can apply for corresponding compensation .

Don’t be too surprised by $5 million. In fact, there are many more expensive consumer compensations in the United States↓↓↓

In 2012, Japanese automobile company Toyota reached a settlement in a class action lawsuit in the United States regarding product safety hazards, agreeing to pay approximately $1.1 billion to install new safety equipment on 16 million vehicles it manufactured or compensate car owners.

The lawsuit was triggered by a recall of Toyota vehicles after a car accident, and the reason for the recall was that Toyota vehicles had unwarranted acceleration. The case was originally scheduled to be heard in court in 2013, but Toyota believed that a prolonged lawsuit would damage the company's image in the United States, so it chose to reach a settlement as soon as possible.

On July 18, 2014, a jury of the Florida District Court of the United States ruled that the second largest tobacco company in the United States, Reynolds Tobacco Company, should pay $23.6 billion in compensation to Cynthia Robinson, the widow of a smoker who died of lung cancer. This huge fine became the second highest amount of compensation awarded by the US court in a "tobacco claim case" in recent years.

For a company like Reynolds Tobacco Company, compensation of hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars is simply not enough to offset the profits it continues to earn, so the amount of compensation must be determined to far exceed the actual losses in order to achieve the effect of the sanctions.

Of course, the nature of each compensation case is different and cannot be compared. What Xiaoxin wants to say is that sky-high compensation is nothing new. Once a merchant infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, it should be deterred and pay a high enough price.

As for the lawsuit against Starbucks, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions too early. Let’s wait and see! ~

If you have more opinions, please click "Write a Comment" to participate in the discussion!

(Xinmin Evening News New Media Comprehensive China News Network, People's Daily Finance Channel, Sina Weibo, etc., pictures are from the Internet)

For more exciting news, please click to read the original text and download the Xinmin Evening News mobile client

If you are looking forward to the outcome of this Starbucks lawsuit, please give a thumbs up ↓↓↓