(由 Google 翻译)显然,Max 和 Billy 认为欺凌和不尊重顾客是可以接受的。难道就因为我们是移民吗?
在我们的第一篇评论中,我们甚至没有提到他们的名字,这正是我们对他们个人隐私的尊重。
他们没有理解这个问题,并致力于改善座位安排,反而试图转移话题。
在奥南·萨迪亚节 (Onam Sadhya) 期间,我们在贝尔格雷夫的 BABAJI Kitchen 餐厅的用餐体验非常令人失望。尽管我们预订了五人座位,却被安排在了最小的桌子上,这显然不够用。五个盘子根本放不下,而且还要我们在这么狭小的空间里用餐。
每位客人支付 38 美元,我们期待着平等的待遇和有尊严的用餐体验。不幸的是,事实并非如此。由于座位安排不当,我们没吃完的食物被收取了费用,而且我们的担忧被无视了。
当我们礼貌地要求与老板谈话时,经理告诉我们老板不在。在收银台,我妻子问了一个关于顾客待遇的简单问题,没有威胁或大声喧哗,但店主拒绝回应。我随后表示,我会将此事上报消费者事务部,因为我们感到自己受到了不尊重,没有得到倾听。
店主在网上提供的回复不准确。即使是小孩子也能看出,那张桌子根本坐不下五个人。真正的问题不在于欧南节或食物,而在于基本的待客之道和公平。我们不是临时来的,我们是提前预订的,但却受到了不公平的对待。
店主和经理的行为让人感到轻视和欺凌。他们坚持让我们坐下来吃饭,尽管我们确实有顾虑。我们强烈敦促Max和Billy反思这次经历,并改进此类活动的管理方式。顾客是为食物和服务付钱,而不是要求帮忙。
我们对Babaji Kitchen的回复感到失望,其中包含多项针对我们行为的虚假和诽谤性指控。我们感到有必要澄清事实,并针对这些指控为自己辩护。
1. 欺凌指控:我们从未欺凌或威胁过任何工作人员。我们曾就座位安排以及我们五人小组座位不足的问题提出过担忧,尽管我们提前预订,但餐厅处理得很糟糕。表达对服务的不满并非欺凌,这是顾客的权利。
2. 进入厨房的虚假指控:我妻子进入厨房并威胁工作人员的说法完全是捏造的。我们曾前往厨房旁边的收银台要求退款并表达我们的担忧。收银台没有使用任何威胁性语言,也没有工作人员受到骚扰。
3. 社交媒体评论:我们在餐厅宣传此次活动的平台上发布了评论并分享了我们的体验。这些都是我们真实经历的描述,并非人身攻击。我们没有向工作人员发送任何不当信息。
4. 餐桌安排:提供的餐桌明显无法容纳五人。我们有照片证据显示,餐桌空间不足以容纳第五个盘子。尽管我们礼貌地请求更合适的安排,但被告知没有其他选择。
5. 退款申请:我们使用维多利亚州消费者事务部的标准模板申请退款,以支付我们未消费的餐费。这是一个合法的流程,并非威胁。
尊重与专业:我们以尊重的态度处理此事,并希望得到同样的回报。遗憾的是,店主选择不与我们直接沟通,而是公开提出具有误导性和破坏性的指控。
(原文)
Apparently Max and Billy thinks bullying and disrespecting the customer is ok. Is it because we are immigrants?
In our first review we didn’t even mention their names and that’s the respect we demonstrated to their personal privacy.
Instead understanding the issue and focusing on improving the seating arrangements , they are trying to divert the topic.
We had a deeply disappointing experience at BABAJI Kitchen in Belgrave during the Onam Sadhya event. Despite making a pre-booking for five people, we were seated at the smallest possible table, which was clearly inadequate. It was physically impossible to place five plates comfortably, and yet we were expected to eat in that cramped space.
Each guest paid $38, and we expected equal treatment and a dignified dining experience. Unfortunately, that was not the case. We were charged for food we couldn’t eat due to the poor seating arrangement, and our concerns were dismissed.
When we politely requested to speak with the owner, the manager informed us that the owner was unavailable. At the cash counter, my wife asked a simple question about customer treatment without any threats or raised voices but the owner refused to respond. I then stated that I would escalate the issue to Consumer Affairs, as we felt disrespected and unheard.
The response provided by the owner online is inaccurate. Even a child could see that five people couldn’t be seated at that table. The real issue was not about Onam or the food it was about basic hospitality and fairness. We were not walk-ins, we had pre-booked, and yet we were treated poorly.
The behavior of the owner and manager felt dismissive and bullying. They insisted we sit and eat despite our genuine concerns. We strongly urge Max and Billy to reflect on this experience and improve how such events are managed. Customers are paying for the food and service not asking for a favor.
We are disappointed by the response from Babaji Kitchen, which includes several false and defamatory claims about our conduct. We feel compelled to clarify the facts and defend ourselves against these allegations.
1. Bullying Accusation: At no point did we bully or threaten any staff member. We raised concerns about the seating arrangement and the lack of accommodation for our group of five, which was handled poorly despite our pre-booking. Expressing dissatisfaction with service is not bullying it is a customer's right.
2. False Allegation of Entering the Kitchen: The claim that my wife entered the kitchen and threatened staff is completely false. We approached the cash counter, which is adjacent to the kitchen, to request a refund and express our concerns. No threatening language was used, and no staff member was harassed.
3. Social Media Comments: We posted a review and shared our experience on platforms where the restaurant had promoted the event. These were factual accounts of our experience, not personal attacks. We did not send any inappropriate messages to staff.
4. Table Arrangement: The table provided was clearly inadequate for five people. We have photographic evidence showing the lack of space for a fifth plate. Despite our polite request for a more suitable arrangement, we were told no alternatives were available.
5. Refund Request: We used the standard Consumer Affairs Victoria template to request a refund for the meals we did not consume. This is a legitimate process and not a threat.
Respect and Professionalism: We approached the situation respectfully and expected the same in return. Unfortunately, the owner chose not to engage with us directly and instead made public accusations that are misleading and damaging.