Public Mediation

Mukesh's Pure Veg Restuarnt-Dispute-#6171400

M. D. vs. Mukesh's Pure Veg Resaurant
new mahim police colony, Mumbai, United States
    • Claimant Seeks: View.
    • Claim #: 6171400
    • Amount Involved: 500.00
    • Filed On: Dec 20, 2011
    • Posted On: Dec 31, 2011
    • Complaint(s):
      • Bad business practices
      • Overcharge or billing error
  • Review this case.
  • Propose your solution.
  • Win the reward (1,000)
Statement of Claim
Claimant says:
"I ate at your restaurant last week. Although the food was excellent and very healthy, I was charged an extra 500 Rps. but the waiter- a Mr. Naresh. I didn't realize until I reach home, that the bill included a "special service" charge just for the privilege of talking to Mr Naresh. Also the Lassi was made from South Indian Mangos and I prefer north Indian ones.

I really don't see why I don't see why I have to pay this charge. Pls fix it a.s.a.p..


Lets test pasting some copy here:

v. why does the button for submitting new info on the claim say "send a message" it should be post info" on the button. I've already brought this up from the staging server version. Lets fix that. Also the effect when you submit is to refresh and move the entire page which is disorientating. It should just confirm that your info has been added and a notice sent to the other party.
vi. ON the "send a message" control, there is no option for public or private as requested. Which mode does it post in by default- private or public?
vii. Need a mouse over on the third party help area too-- its less than self-explanatory.
viii. Counter-offer "make your own offer" is confusing text. Does it mean "as opposed to making someone else's offer?
ix. Fonts on the email messages are too small and subtle in my view. Looks like just a lot of fine print. The main issue should be large and bold and give me the link. Not somethi8ng that’s urgent, but if we want them read, they can't be so subtle.
x. Will the events list scroll if its too long?
xi. The new info added, should have a way to highlight new posts better. On the claim I responded to all were new, so its hard to tell, but any new info needs to be somehow highlighted. Presumably the "edit" control is dimmed when the other person receives your info?
xii. On the yellow box, the default message should be "Steve Hutchens agrees to release you of any further claim in this matter" not …release of this claim" the latter wouldn’t mean much.
xiii. The copy regarding public posting is a bit lost and should say "claimant has elected to post the contents of this claim online in the event that its unresolved by "posting date".
xiv. We used to have a sentence that pointed out that a PeopleClaim is not a legal claim and you are not required by law to response, however in the event that this matter is unresolved, this claim will post publically online for viewer review and comment" I think this would be more powerful and informative than what we currently have. Any thoughts?
xv. I'm fine with the blank section for now for the 3rd party help. But, I think we should add a video about the benefits of our service there. Maybe we can get Samantha to make one?
xvi. Message system seems to work well
xvii. I tried to make a counter offer, but we still have the old headers there. Due date, "value" which is poorly aligned. Should we be using "value": or" amount" Value sort of works in a way, but will it be confusing when the counter offer displays on the abstract? Steve, pls see if we can update the titles as we agreed with joel on the "what I want" section. Lets get that into both the file and the response and abstract sections a.s.a.p.
xviii. On reject, the order of the choices are inverted incorrectly. Should be "reject (not rejecting) this offer without an explanation" Reject and include an explanation" ( "let me explain" is a bit strained in my view and its better to use a language consistent with the pervious item), There are terms (no need for the word "other" in my view) under which I'd be willing to resolve this claim. That might even be better as a question, but that’s a bit inconsistent with a check box. Might be worth trying though. Are there any terms under which you'd be willing to resolve this matter? BTW, why is Terms capitalized here?
xix. I'm getting a strange effect where at times it seems that the old version show up when I mouse over the accept, reject ect buttons and at other times it’s the new version. Is this possible? It looks like the old "intermediate" step that we took out where the users was given some instructions about when to choose a particular response and they had to double click to get the final form?
xx. The tab was supposed to change to "counter-offer" if they choose "there are terms under which I'd be willing to resolve this claim" what happened to that?
xxi. The formatting on the "edit email address" is strange. The wording the send collides with the Edit button.
xxii. Might be nice if the item box expanded to fit longer text rather than hiding the text as you type- that seems pretty old fashion . The box could move down instead. Tool tip for the due date is nice but of course you only see it when the curser goes intot he box. Do I "click the calendar to change the date" or to add it? Seems a big confusing.
xxiii. How do I change the currency from $? We offer this when you file I think, why constrain the respondent?
xxiv. On reject with explanation or what is currently "let me explain", the text box on the last item- for another reason" writes in watermark, should be regular text. Not sure what it appears as for eth viewer.
xxv. On reject, once I finished, the yellow box at the top showed "suggestions from the public have been made" why would this display if no suggestions had been made? Nothing happens when I click the "see below" link next to that message.
xxvi. How does this affect you? Doesn’t seem to load anything
xxvii. All links off the page should be either light boxes, popups or new browser pages, I left the page on a few of these only to find the response page was gone and I had to go back an reload it.
xxviii. I added info to the claim and submitted it, but I didn’t get any confirm email that I had added info, I don’t know if claimant Hutchens got any email notice or not, but he should have.
xxix. Add exhibit, doesn’t seem to work. I get an error "false" then is says please select exhibit availability type for exhibit" no idea what that means and doesn’t seem to be anywhere to add that.
xxx. Ok now I see, it opens a box above where the exhibit control is. Most people will miss this as I did. That box should go beneath the control and the watermark should be "title or name of exhibit attached"
xxxi. Remove the phone # field from the forward claim box.
xxxii. From field should autofil the responder's info if its available
xxxiii. On exhibits- lots of problems here
1) No options for "cut and paste" although it does seem to add a new box if I choose "in my possession" but gives no explanation for what the box is for. Add a cut and paste option that triggers the additional text box
2) The process freezes once you choose "attach now" this should be the default and should show up in the menu dropdown as the default with the browse button defaulted too in my view- although this may not be the best solutions- I'm open to better ideas. In any case it shouldn’t freeze so that you cannot add or change the title or choose other options if you change your mind. Also the formatting is corrupted and extends a white bar well into the right margin once the browse button is added via selecting the "attach now" option.
3) I re-clicked the attach button and this time I go 3 "browse" buttons.
4) Water mark "name your attachments" rather than "title or name" because it wasn’t clear to me that the title fi8eld related to the attachments because it appears above the "attach exhibit" link. BTW change that link to "add attachments" because only one of the options is to attach the others reference items only or as mentioned above will offer "paste info" not attach.
5) We should provide for public/private options for the attachment as separate from the message. I think this was discussed and we thought it would be ok this way, but seems if you want to reference an attachment in a public message, but keep the attachment private, you should have a set of make public keep private controls for both the attachment and the message. this will also make more clear the title bar for the attachment as being associated with the attachment not the message if we place a set of make public …. Controls above it that pertain to the message only.
6) When I select attach exhibit, it gives me an error "pls select exhibit availability type for exhibit" no idea where I do this.
7) When I attached a large file, it showed up as attached-doubt it was because it was large and probably didn’t have time to load, but it gave me an arrow below the
attaché exhibit link "please enter message" no idea what that refers to or what Im supposed to do.
8) So the proper sequence should be as follows
xxxiv. The language on the "what will happen if this claim is not resolved? Should be: Claim details will post at……. "will post…" is a bit abrupt.
a) The copy "in exchange ….." is incorrect" Should be "claim has agreed per PeopleClaim terms of service to release you from any further claim in this matter"
b) Add message should be add message to the other party" (or fill in their name for clarity?)
i) Do they get a separate email about the message or is it just included in the acceptance confirmation notice?

didn’t choose any. In fact, lets just create a calculator there that askes them: "how much time have you spent trying to resolve your problem with Walmart ( ) hrs _(you can use fractions of an hour ). "how much is your time worth per hour $() - total request for your time $(). Then we add an optiunal text box where they can ad details pp. The effect of "anyone with relavant advice or info… that causes all boxes to be checked is strange. We need to rethink the choices a bit here.
qq. Need to water mark "my time in trying to resolve this problem" and let them keep that there w"
Mukesh's Pure Veg Resaurant has responded to this complaint Click here to view
...
Reply Have a similar problem?
Additional Communication Between Claimant and Mukesh's Pure Veg Resaurant Hide
  • Dec 20, 2011, Claiming party added:
  • Please try to respond to my claim asap to test the process.

  • Dec 21, 2011, () added:
  • Looks like just a lot of fine print.

  • Dec 21, 2011, () added:
  • This is a test message from Vishant. Seems like there was a corruption of few code files in the last release (Monday) and because of which few code files were in invalid state.

What Claimant Wants Hide
Message from Mukesh's Pure Veg Resaurant: Looks like just a lot of fine print.
Non-Cash
What By When How Much
1. Apology: say your sorry pls Jan 04, 2013 N/A
2. Change of policy: stop charging me for his company Jan 04, 2012 N/A
Cash
1. Refund: Naresh's waiter-wallah Charge Jan 04, 2012 $500.00
Just make me happy!
Claimant invites Mukesh's Pure Veg Resaurant to make a fair offer to resolve this complaint.
Cash total : $500.00
Non-cash: 2 items
  • 4
Do you agree with the claimant’s demands?  (If you are a party to this claim, click here.)
Awaiting response from Party
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"df ghdf hdfh"
 (6 months ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"df ghdf hdfh"
 (6 months ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"sds dsadsfsff"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"Terms are correct,"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
VP PV commented
VP PV (Comment):
"Ok. What this claim is all about by the way?"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
VP PV likes
VP PV ():
"Terms are correct, but I feel, claimant should adjust the amount he is claiming back. $300 is ok IMO."
 (2 years ago)
Reply
Respondent dislikes
Respondent: ():
"sc zxc"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
Respondent commented
Respondent: (Comment):
"xc xcxcxc"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"sd f f"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
Respondent likes
Respondent: ():
"dcdc"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
mukesh haval dislikes
mukesh haval ():
"asfasfasf"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
Respondent dislikes
Respondent: ():
"Naresh's waiter-wallah Charge $500.00"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"28424 28424 28424 28424 28424"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
Respondent's Counteroffer Hide
What By When How Much
1. Naresh's waiter-wallah Charge Dec 01, 2016 $150.00
Cash total : $150.00
  • 0
Do you agree with the respondent’s Response?  (If you are a party to this claim, click here.)
Awaiting response from Party
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"test YNM comment/question"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"mukesh"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"test again"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"sdf sdfsdf"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"new offer comment"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
mukesh haval commented
mukesh haval (Comment):
"saf asf"
 (2 years ago)
Reply
Refresh
  • Show:
  • Sort by:
  • 1
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
  • 1
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
  • 1
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
  • 1
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
  • 1
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
  • 2
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
  • 2
If you are a party to this claim, click here.
Is this a fair resolution?
  • 1