Despite arriving on time for their reservation, the punctual patron had to pay the price for rushing before the meal.
Content creator Sean Lance has sparked debate over restaurant cancellation fees after complaining that he and his friend were allegedly charged $25 for not ordering food at an unnamed NYC restaurant despite arriving with a reservation.
The Post has contacted Lance for comment.
“If you arrive for your reservation at a restaurant, but leave before purchasing anything, do you think you should still be charged a cancellation fee?” the creator said a now viral tiktok videoWhich has been viewed more than 225,000 times in just a few days.
According to Lance, he and his friend had booked a reservation at “one of those annoying restaurants where you have to put your card in” to secure a table.
Although he did not reveal the name of the restaurant, he claimed that the eatery had a 24-hour cancellation policy with a $25 fee.
He added, “But it all had to be OK because we made the reservation on time – in fact, we arrived about 10 minutes early.”
The pair were sitting at their table when Lance’s friend started feeling sick, they ran to the bathroom and sat there for what Lance estimated was 15 minutes. Texting her from the toilet, the friend said she feared vomiting or worse, and “doesn’t have the appetite to eat a full meal.”
So, she informed her waiter that she had fallen ill and left without ordering.
“Fast forward to today, she checked her credit card statement and saw she was charged a $25 cancellation fee,” he said.
Upon calling the restaurant to inquire about the fee, the establishment informed them that the fee was not just for cancellation. In fact, they boasted a “minimum spend” policy, and since the party of two didn’t order anything, they were still required to pay the $25 fee.
According to Lance, the restaurant claimed the policy was to protect the business from loss of “revenue” should someone show up and not spend the money.
“But then I’m reading this policy, looking at the fine print, and there’s nothing about ‘minimum spending,'” claimed Lance, who expressed his frustration at the policy’s inconsistency and “didn’t see that “How it can be implemented.”
In the comments, viewers were divided on whether Lance’s party should pay the fee or not.
“That’s a cancellation fee, not a minimum spend fee,” one viewer scoffed.
“If it’s not in their policy, they can’t legally charge,” claimed another. “I get it, but they have to put it in writing to make it stick.”
Another said, “If a restaurant can’t stay open with food alone at a profit then they shouldn’t be in business.”
“He should not have pressed charges out of courtesy. Clearly here, there were mitigating circumstances,” one user shouted.
However, others disagreed.
One person argued, “Showing up and not spending the money and then walking away is actually worse than canceling.” “You’re canceling in person as late as possible.”
“Yeah, quitting is no different than cancellation,” commented another.
“You personally canceled, bro,” someone else quipped.
“Really in favor of the restaurant,” one user said. “These places have cancellation fees because they make you lose valuable business that is on the table, just so you don’t spend the money.”
