評論
打印
Associate professor Benjamin Edelman had threatened legal action and demanded the Sichuan Garden in Brookline compensate all other customers who might have been similarly overcharged after he said it charged him $1 more on each of the four items he ordered for takeout last week.
這位名叫BenjaminEdelman的副教授以法律訴訟相威脅，并要求這家位于布魯克萊恩的四川飯莊賠償所以可能多付了錢的顧客。此前，他說自己上周叫外賣時(shí)點(diǎn)了四道菜，而餐館每道菜分別多收他一塊錢。
But after facing wide criticism, Edelman posted a brief message on his personal website saying he has reached out to apologize to Ran Duan, who helps manage his parent's restaurant business.
在受到廣泛批評后，Edelman在個(gè)人網(wǎng)站上發(fā)出簡潔信息說明他已經(jīng)向協(xié)助父母管理這家餐館的段然（RanDuan）致歉。
Based on the prices listed on the restaurant's website, Edelman said he had expected to pay $53.35 for his order.
根據(jù)餐館網(wǎng)站上的價(jià)目表，Edelman說他原本應(yīng)付的價(jià)格是53.35美元。
In emails first made public by boston.com, Duan acknowledged to Edelman that the prices listed onthe restaurant's website were out of date. He promised to update them soon and offered to refund the overages.
從首封公開在boston.com上的郵件中可以看到，段向Edelman確認(rèn)餐館網(wǎng)站上的價(jià)目表過期了，他答應(yīng)會(huì)立刻更新并退還多收的費(fèi)用。
But Edelman, who consults for AOL,Microsoft, the NFL, Wells Fargo, the New York Times, among many others on "preventing and detecting online fraud," according to his personal website, accused the restaurant of systematically overcharging customers.
據(jù)Edelma的個(gè)人網(wǎng)站，他是美國在線公司、微軟公司、美國國家橄欖球聯(lián)盟、富國銀行、紐約時(shí)報(bào)及其他公司 “預(yù)防檢測網(wǎng)絡(luò)欺詐”方面的顧問。Edelma還控告這家餐館利用系統(tǒng)多收費(fèi)。
He demanded a $12 refund, arguing that hewas eligible for triple damages under the state's consumer protection statute.Edelman, a Brookline resident, also contacted local officials to demand the restaurant compensateall other customers who might have been affected.
他要求餐館賠償12美元，并爭論說根據(jù)國家消費(fèi)者保護(hù)法，他有資格得到3倍的賠償。住在布魯克萊恩的Edelman還聯(lián)系了當(dāng)?shù)毓賳T，要求餐館賠償所有可能牽涉其中的顧客。
"It strikes me that merely providing are fund to a single customer would be an exceptionally light sanction for the violation that occurred," he wrote in one of the exchanges with Duan."You don't seem to recognize that this is a legal matter."
他在寫給段的一封郵件中說，“我突然覺得他們僅想一名顧客賠款的話，那制裁也太輕了。你好像并沒有認(rèn)識(shí)到這是個(gè)法律問題”。
At one point, after a flurry of email exchanges, Duan, who generally remained respectful in his replies to Edelman,wrote: "Like I said, I apologize for the confusion, you seem like a smart man, but is this really worth your time?"
在多次進(jìn)行郵件交流后，段的回復(fù)大體保留著恭敬的態(tài)度，他寫道：“正如我說過的，我就造成的困惑向你致歉，感覺你是個(gè)明智的人，但你真的覺得值得花這個(gè)時(shí)間嗎？”
Edelman later told the Boston Globe that Brookline officials declined to intervene. The restaurant, he said, subsequently offered to refundhim half the cost of his total bill after he requested it.
Edelman之后對《波士頓環(huán)球報(bào)》說，布魯克萊恩的官員們拒絕干涉此事。他說，經(jīng)他要求，這家餐館隨后退給他半數(shù)金額。
