Gluten Free Pizza NOT Gluten Free!

peachyprice

You do have to wonder why a doctor would order from there, knowing there's no GF on the menu. Hopefully they pay more attention to their patients well being than they do their friends

Pollycat

peachyprice wrote: »

You do have to wonder why a doctor would order from there, knowing there's no GF on the menu.

I think the above is an excellent point, especially wen it clearly wasn't a spur-of-the moment thing, according to the OP:

bigp26 wrote: »

So, I am a sufferer of Coeliac Disease, as is my father. We were diagnosed with such around 8 years ago.

On Saturday, we attended a family event where pizzas were ordered to feed everybody.

And it's not like the diagnosis is recent either.

ThumbRemote

peachyprice wrote: »

You do have to wonder why a doctor would order from there, knowing there's no GF on the menu. Hopefully they pay more attention to their patients well being than they do their friends

Where does your obsession with the menu come from?

Since OP says it was a 'local place', maybe the order-er walked into the shop and asked, rather than reading a menu.

whitelabel

The only recourse would be to go in your self or your Dr friend again and ask for a gf pizza and see what they say. If the Dr recognises the staff may be ask them for the same gf pizza as last time.

If the staff member made the mistake and remembers or admits it (unlikely) then the business could be held vicariously liable for their actions.

Its a long shot though

peachyprice

ThumbRemote wrote: »

Where does your obsession with the menu come from?

Since OP says it was a 'local place', maybe the order-er walked into the shop and asked, rather than reading a menu.

I would hardly call it an obsession.

And even if they did walk in, legally the menu would have been available to read. The person ordering knew they had guests with coeliac disease, they should have checked and double checked, the most logical way of doing so would be to read the menu. Perhaps if they had they would have questioned again whether GF was actually available.

Would you rely on a restaurant to buy in ingredients for a pizza they don't sell, just for one customer? I wouldn't, I'd find somewhere that did sell it and order from there knowing that I would then get what I ordered.

Failing to provide what you have on your menu is one thing, someone asking for something you don't even have on the menu and assuming 100% that they're going to get it, even though they were told at the time delivery and before eating, that it wasn't what they needed, is something else entirely.

OP would have far more recourse if GF had have been on the menu and the restaurant had failed to provide it, all they have now is one persons word against the other that the orderer even asked for GF. What's to say the orderer didn't ask if they had GF, the pizzeria replied 'no we only have vegan' and the doctor replied 'that'll do'? Without GF on the menu that could quite easily be the case.

Even when OP phoned and asked if they did GF they said no, so it's not looking good for the person who ordered actually asking for the correct thing (despite them being a doctor).

You see, the menu in quite an important factor, not my obsession, because without GF on the menu the pizzeria will just say they never ever said they would provide a GF pizza, because they don't sell it, so why would they?

ThumbRemote

peachyprice wrote: »

I would hardly call it an obsession.

And even if they did walk in, legally the menu would have been available to read. The person ordering knew they had guests with coeliac disease, they should have checked and double checked, the most logical way of doing so would be to read the menu. Perhaps if they had they would have questioned again whether GF was actually available.

Would you rely on a restaurant to buy in ingredients for a pizza they don't sell, just for one customer? I wouldn't, I'd find somewhere that did sell it and order from there knowing that I would then get what I ordered.

Failing to provide what you have on your menu is one thing, someone asking for something you don't even have on the menu and assuming 100% that they're going to get it, even though they were told at the time delivery and before eating, that it wasn't what they needed, is something else entirely.

You're just being argumentative for the sake of it. Why would someone have checked a menu if they've asked a member of staff? If they assume the staff member is wrong, why would the menu be right? Do they just continue checking ad infinitum?

If I go into my local pizza shop and ask for a BBQ chicken with pineapple, I wouldn't check the menu to check if those toppings exist. I'd expect the person serving me to tell me they don't do BBQ chicken topping. In fact, if I specifically ask if they do have BBQ chicken, and they tell me yes, I wouldn't get out a menu and ask them to point to the place where it's on the menu.

The scenario is:
Person A asks person B something
Person B gives an untrue answer
You blame person A for this.

How bizarre. Do you work on the basis that everyone in the world tells lies all the time?

peachyprice wrote: »

You see, the menu in quite an important factor, not my obsession, because without GF on the menu the pizzeria will just say they never ever said they would provide a GF pizza, because they don't sell it, so why would they?

I agree entirely here, the menu would be a helpful factor if it were to go to court. Which is pretty much what I said in the first reply.

But there's a difference between not being able to prove something in court, and your comments on this thread. You are trying to blame a different person entirely.

peachyprice

ThumbRemote wrote: »

You're just being argumentative for the sake of it.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

That's rich, coming from you of all people

ThumbRemote wrote: »

The scenario is:
Person A asks person B something
Person B gives an untrue answer
You blame person A for this.

How bizarre. Do you work on the basis that everyone in the world tells lies all the time?

And we know that's how the conversation went, how exactly? As OP was not the person who ordered we do not have a clue who said what to whom.

gik

ThumbRemote wrote: »

You're just being argumentative for the sake of it. Why would someone have checked a menu if they've asked a member of staff? If they assume the staff member is wrong, why would the menu be right? Do they just continue checking ad infinitum?

If I go into my local pizza shop and ask for a BBQ chicken with pineapple, I wouldn't check the menu to check if those toppings exist. I'd expect the person serving me to tell me they don't do BBQ chicken topping. In fact, if I specifically ask if they do have BBQ chicken, and they tell me yes, I wouldn't get out a menu and ask them to point to the place where it's on the menu.

The scenario is:
Person A asks person B something
Person B gives an untrue answer
You blame person A for this.

How bizarre. Do you work on the basis that everyone in the world tells lies all the time?



I agree entirely here, the menu would be a helpful factor if it were to go to court. Which is pretty much what I said in the first reply.

But there's a difference between not being able to prove something in court, and your comments on this thread. You are trying to blame a different person entirely.

My perception is that YOU are one of the most argumentative people on this board. You appear to seek conflict where there is none

ThumbRemote

peachyprice wrote: »

And we know that's how the conversation went, how exactly? As OP was not the person who ordered we do not have a clue who said what to whom.

No, we don't. But I am working on the basis that the OP gave a reliable account of proceedings. As such, when they say "My cousin had ordered a gluten free pizza from a local place" I work on the basis that the cousin had, indeed, ordered a gluten free pizza.


On the other hand you have gone on and on about the menu, you've said that the cousin was "leaving it to chance", wasn't "thoughtful towards her guests" and knew "there's no GF on the menu". You've made every one of those up, with no basis on what the OP posted. Essentially you've made up a whole fictional scenario - seemingly just so you can criticise someone other than the shop. Why would you do that?

ThumbRemote

gik wrote: »

My perception is that YOU are one of the most argumentative people on this board. You appear to seek conflict where there is none

No I don't