Burger King UK

I am staff member of Burger King and I get only 13 hours next week and 5 hours this week and I am full time worker supervisor manager is not coooperative with staff members no discipline and do partiality between members others members using phone between shifts and wear jewellery and she always shout on me without any reason I never wear any jeweller never use phone I request her so many time to shift me in other store if she cant give me hours but no response and she had issue my holidays on back date in march I never said anything regarding that please solve my issue as soon as possible I am full time worker she has to give me 25+hours at least

/19 Inglewood Road

Rainford

St Helens

WA11 7QL

11/ 9/2021

KARALI

Avon House

Arden Road

Ealing

W13 8RP

25/9/2021

Dear Mr Penny

Thank you for your reply to my letter dated 11/09/2021. Unfortunately, the description of the incident that you specified did not happen.

In the Burger King Drive-through, there was no queue, no one was sat down inside the restaurant, and no one was in front of me in the drive-thru facility.

However, your staff were still instructing customers to wait in the car park. Moreover, my order was a simple Double Wopper Burger. If you can not cope with one burger, I think there may be a defect in the customer service practice at this St Helens restaurant. Furthermore, a poor impression is given when one of your staff feels it appropriate to remarked to me "you can go somewhere else"!

Furthermore, there is no signage indicating what may be an exemption clause[Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking Ltd [1971] QB 163"]

I was not aware of the condition.

Consequently, Burger King had not done enough to give reasonable notice of the condition. A normally written clause is not incorporated into an unsigned contract unless:

The claimant is aware of it;

The defendant gave the claimant reasonable notice that the document contains contract terms; or

A reasonable person would realise that the document contained contract terms.

However, where the clause is unusual or onerous, Burger King must do more. They must ensure that the customer has reasonable notice of the clause itself, not just the fact that the document contains contractual clauses.

Lord Denning argued that sufficient notice must usually be immediately noticeable and eye-catching printed in red ink with a red hand pointing to it or something equally startling.

Therefore, it was not part of the contract to indicate that you will have to wait in the car park for your order. In my opinion, this is a clear breach of contract, and perhaps a breach of the Consumer Protection Act (as Amended).

Essentially, a drive-through is understood by most reasonable people to mean what it says "A Drive through".

A notice can not be binding in any event, because it was only brought to my attention after I had paid and the contract had already been created. The offer was the notice at the menu entrance, which I accepted by driving in. By the time I had paid for the goods, it was too late to change the contract.

Accordingly, you only stop your car to pick up your order. That situation is understood; by most people to be the procedure.

Customers then leave the restaurant through the drive-thru facility, not the car park. Consequently, this is a contract and is understood to mean what it says by most customers.

Therefore, Drive-Thru's can be dangerous places, people have been killed during this process.

Subsequently, changing and misusing this accepted practice is dangerous. Therefore, if you can not operate a drive-through to contract and what people understand you should close it down, as it is a misrepresentation of the drive-thru procedure.

I will give you 14 days to reply to my letter, failure to reply within this time scale will provoke legal action.o not use burger KingD