is it unlawful to cancel delivary after the food was made?

[krnbatman]

my dad's company is trying to get sued or asked to pay for the food that my dad canceled,

I already sent you a letter requesting for cooperation.
On 9/20/07 I prepared packed lunches for your company (for about
40 persons) under the implied contract. However, your company
cancelled the order 45 minutes before packing unconditionally without
any reason.
I can not help but to point out, as an example, you did not show exemplary behavior in the town as you ordered through another restaurant and violated general practices and customs of society.
I hereby request you to pay me $820 for the loss caused by item 2 above. This covers the food cost (prepared but unable to deliver), the Korean food material that could not be used elsewhere and the labor cost which was unnecessarily paid out.

is it unlawful?

[Athias]

I wouldn't be surprised if your dad's company did get sued. I would be pretty pissed if all that food went to waste too. So he probably will have to pay for it someway or another. But I could be wrong.

[krnbatman]

well it says they called 45mins b4 packing, lolz,

820$ is chump change for my dad's company but still its money that doesnt want to go down the drain,

[Athias]

well it says they called 45mins b4 packing, lolz,

820$ is chump change for my dad's company but still its money that doesnt want to go down the drain,

Calling 45 minutes before packing means the restaurant had the food prepared and they were almost ready to deliver it. So they had to throw all the food away because it couldn't be re-used. So the restaurant lost around $800 because of your dad. It's only fair that he pays them back.

[CabooseNation]

They've got a good case.

Your dad's going to have to pay up...

[Lantagonist]

you dad will have to pay

[shadowsworn]

What are they supposed to do with the food?

Of course your dad should have to pay for it.

*annoyed*

[Attila]

Canceling the food isn't illegal, not paying for it is. You basicaly made them prepare you food that you didn't need so you wasted their materials.

[Deimos]

820$ is chump change for my dad's company

so hand it over.

problem solved.

duh.

[Lantagonist]

so hand it over.

problem solved.

duh.

Well said Deimos

[hksmrchan]

well, i dont blame them, i would be pinssed too inf i spent like 3 hours working on food for 40 people, then someone calls in and says they dont need it

[SURVIVALsp1]

It's not wrong, but it isn't right either.

They made so much food, but then they had to throw it away, thus losing profits. They're pissed and they are going to court if your dad doesn't pay.

[power_gamer_6]

Since there was an implied contract, then yes, it is unlawful.
Otherwise it would not be unlawful, but a major inconvenience for the restaurant and your dad would still have to pay, should they have ended up going to court over it.

[Raiyne]

I'm sure that if they did sue, they would most probably win.

Talk about irresponsible.

[Manic]

If they can prove without a doubt that your father ordered that food, then they have a case. If they have no signatures, no witnesses other than employees, and no other evidence of your father either making that phone call or showing up in person to order the food, then they have no case. Implied contract or not, all your dad needs to say is "I did not order food from these people". It's the same concept as when a woman will give her boyfriend a few thousand dollars as a loan, and they then break up, so the woman takes the boyfriend to court. Unless a formal document was filled out and signed by both parties, there is no proof whatsoever that the money given was not a gift, and if the defendant chooses to take that stand he will win the case. Is it fair? Not exactly, but it is reasonable. I could pick and choose any major corporation in the phone book and say they ordered food from me and refused to pay, but without proof other than my own word I would have no case whatsoever.

[Lantagonist]

If they can prove without a doubt that your father ordered that food, then they have a case. If they have no signatures, no witnesses other than employees, and no other evidence of your father either making that phone call or showing up in person to order the food, then they have no case. Implied contract or not, all your dad needs to say is "I did not order food from these people". It's the same concept as when a woman will give her boyfriend a few thousand dollars as a loan, and they then break up, so the woman takes the boyfriend to court. Unless a formal document was filled out and signed by both parties, there is no proof whatsoever that the money given was not a gift, and if the defendant chooses to take that stand he will win the case. Is it fair? Not exactly, but it is reasonable. I could pick and choose any major corporation in the phone book and say they ordered food from me and refused to pay, but without proof other than my own word I would have no case whatsoever.

technology today u can track phone calls

[Manic]

technology today u can track phone calls

Which proves nothing at all, other than the fact that one person called another.

[Aerozon]

Sorry i had to do it...i convinced my dad to buy me a new paintball gun and he was gonna sue somebody...GUESS IT WAS JOO!! Jk but yeah Deimos took the words outta my mouth, if it isnt a big deal for you...give it to themOh and your dad called them and told them that he doesnt need it but he probably knew they were gonna be pissed and sue, so why didnt your dad just take the damn food?! And the restuarant threw the food away? Wow they are ****ing starving people all over the world and NOW U MADE IT WORSE!!!!!!

[Rodenty]

Which proves nothing at all, other than the fact that one person called another.

wrong

we had dog deaththreats at 3 in the morning constantly from a wacko across the street in the flats and all we had for prooth is a phonecall so the police bugged it and had enough proof after one night and the wife and husband were locked up for 2years

[Raiyne]

wrong

we had dog deaththreats at 3 in the morning constantly from a wacko across the street in the flats and all we had for prooth is a phonecall so the police bugged it and had enough proof after one night and the wife and husband were locked up for 2years

The police are not going to bug the OP's phone just to make sure his dad is the one who ordered food and since he's already ordered, its over and I'm pretty sure he won't do it again.

And wtf, both husband and wife, 2 years in the slammer for death threats? That doesn't sound like the truth at all to me.

[Fullmetal]

It's really the company (Not your dad's) that made the food that should get in trouble,they made food to feed 40 people,and they threw it away? Think of the starving children people,c'mon!