Some McDonald’s stores used to charge separate prices for Quarter Pounders depending on whether they did or did not include cheese, but then moved to a policy of charging the same price either way. Lawyers have now filed an intended class action claiming that two South Florida clients “have suffered injury” because under the new pricing scheme they “were required to pay for cheese… that they did not want and did not receive.”” [Howard Cohen, Miami Herald]
18 Comments
At McDonald’s in my area the Quarter Pound Hamburger costs less than the Quarter Pounder with Cheese, IF you are just buying the sandwiches. If you want a value meal with fries and drink, there no longer is a combination with the Quarter Pound Hamburger. Instead you order a Quarter Pounder with Cheese value meal, no cheese. The value meal discount makes it cheaper than buying a separate sandwich, fry and drink. As McDonald’s shifts to ‘cook to order’, expect a lot of the similar sandwiches to be discontinued. There will be just a few ‘base’ sandwiches, and variations will be produced by the customers themselves punching in special orders at kiosks.
I’m sorry. We have no milk for the coffee. Will you take it without cream?
Don’t go to McDonalds. Problem solved.
Unreal. What are the odds that an injustice like this would happen to lawyers, of all people?
I don’t know how they can claim they were “forced” to buy anything, yet that was the language they used.
They’re merely charging a premium for a lactose free sandwich…
I have ‘gone without’ many a tasty burger simply because…..it appears that if I ask for “a quarter-Pounder beefbuger, please” it turns out to include cheese, but worse still (for me) strips of bacon (allergy to ham, bacon & pork)… so I hope that the forthcoming prospect of a legal battle between the profiteers McDonalds, ( as opposed to less well known caterers who actually CARE for all of their constomers ) will resolve these and similar related issues once and for all.
Just a thought…if a franchisee cannot tolerate or handle consumer’s requirements (within well-specified field) he/she really ought to find a way of terminating their franchise agreement…. better still, get it 100% right before opening the business.
By that logic, if I go into a Kosher joint, I should be able to get a bacon cheeseburger.
Bob
Huh? The plaintiffs aren’t saying that Mickey D’s failed to make the burger they asked for – rather, they’re saying that Mickey D’s didn’t give them a discount for leaving the cheese off their burger.
If that’s the game we’re going to play, then when a customer asks for a cola with no ice, do they get a discount for not consuming ice or do they get a surcharge for the extra cola?
Offer cheese for free. Get sued.
Clearly the golden arches must institute a la carte pricing on their burgers. Want cheese? That will cost you. Want onions or pickles? Pony up for them. After all, lawyers know best when it comes to running or purchasing the product of a burger joint – not the owners / operators or customers.
I certainly don’t want to derail this thread (there’s already ketchup on my keyboard) but am I the only one who thought “if being forced to pay for something you don’t want or in the case of people with allergies can’t use, is morally, ethically and legally wrong,” then how is it that single males in this country are paying for gynecological services* under the Affordable Care Act?
Just saying…..
*one of many services that people may never need.
Because gender is a social construct. Just because your chromosomes are XY doesn’t mean that you may not identify with a person with the need for gynecological services.
wfjag,
You almost owed me a new keyboard. The coffee that I blew on it after reading your comment thankfully didn’t kill it.
Why people want to pay more for a Hamburger, I don’t understand.
The quarter pounder is in the system, just not listed on the menu?
go into 5 guys and you will see two prices 1 for a Hamburger and 1 for a CheeseBurger
If you went in the next day and they took off the Hamburger and charged you the Cheese Burger price, which is a dollar more, would you be happy??????????????
and don’t forget, they just took it off the display, but if you can get the cashier to ring in up by pressing the Hamburger button on the register, you won’t want that?
You want to pay $0.30 to $1.00 more for cheese you don’t get and then they resell it?
You want to pay $0.30 to $1.00 more for cheese you don’t get and then they resell it?
They aren’t “reselling” the cheese. It is not used cheese.
Still, if that is the way the company wants to structure their pricing, why should lawyers have any legal say in the issue? You don’t know the business decision behind the pricing and if it is to make more money, then welcome to the free market.
If I don’t like the way something is priced – especially a fast food burger – I can go elsewhere. I can walk with my feet and my wallet.
Russell– You are paying less for the cheese, but more for the management effort to remove the cheese (which you presumably disliked) from a standardized product.
Roughly evens out…
The problem is history: for all the decades since debut, McDonald’s triained their customers to use the nomenclature “Quarter Pounder” for the hamburger and “Quarter Pounder With Cheese” for the cheeseburger, and expect different pricing. Suddenly one day they up and decide to change the definition of “Quarter Pounder” to Quarter Pounder with cheese, define a new term “Quarter Pounder Without Cheese” to mean the old “Quarter Pounder”, eliminate the old term “Quarter Pounder With Cheese”, and let each store decide whether or not to offer different prices. While a totally asinine, anti-customer move, it is fully within the rights of private business, so the suit is frivolous and will get tossed. However, as part of a publicity campaign to pressure McDonald’s into becoming slightly less anti-customer, the suit might be effective.