A man in California suffered severe burns from hot tea bought from Starbucks, which led to skin grafts and permanent scarring. He alleged that the employee did not fit the tea properly in the tray, causing it to fall on his waist and thighs. In this case, the Los Angeles County jury ordered Starbucks to pay damages of $50 million i.e. Rs 386 crore.
A man in California got burnt by hot tea bought from Starbucks, after which the court has ordered him to pay damages of 50 million dollars (about Rs 386 crore). Michael Garcia got so severely burnt by the tea that he had to undergo skin grafts and got permanent scars on his body.
This incident happened on 8 February 2020, when Garcia was working as a Postmates delivery driver. He ordered three drinks from a Starbucks drive-thru in Los Angeles. When he was given the drinks on a tray, he was seen struggling to handle it while driving the car. It is alleged that the employee did not fit the boiling tea properly in the tray, due to which the tea fell on his waist and thighs and he suffered third-degree burns.
negligence suit filed
Garcia filed a negligence suit against Starbucks, saying that the company was grossly negligent about the safety of its customers. CCTV footage presented during the suit showed that Garcia felt uncomfortable after taking the drink in his hand, but the employee did not provide him with any additional safety measures.
A Los Angeles County jury found in favor of Garcia and ordered Starbucks to pay him $50 million in damages. His attorney, Nick Rowley, said the verdict highlights Starbucks' negligence and sends an important message to prevent similar incidents in the future.
The jury's decision was wrong - Starbucks
However, Starbucks has disagreed with this decision and said that they will appeal again. The company's statement said, 'We sympathize with Garcia, but the jury's decision is wrong and the damages are unrealistically high. We give top priority to the safety of our customers.'
The case is a warning to brands that take consumer safety lightly. Despite Starbucks appealing the decision, the incident has sparked a larger debate about poor customer service and a lack of safety measures.
