Summarize this content to 2000 words in 6 paragraphs
Despite arriving at his reservation on time, a punctual patron paid the price for dashing before dining.
Content creator Sean Lans has drummed up a debate over restaurant cancellation fees after complaining that he and his friend were allegedly charged a $25 fee for not ordering any food at an unnamed NYC restaurant, despite showing up for their reservation.
The Post has reached out to Lans for comment.
“If you show up to your reservation at a restaurant, but leave before buying anything, do you think you should still get charged the cancellation fee?” the creator said in a now-viral TikTok video, which has scored more than 225,000 views in a matter of days.
According to Lans, he and his friend had booked a reservation at “one of those annoying a – – restaurants where you have to put in your card” in order to secure a table.
While he did not name the restaurant, he claimed that the eatery had a 24-hour cancellation policy with a $25 fee.
“But it should have been all fine because we showed up to this reservation on time — in fact, we were, like, 10 minutes early,” he continued.
The pair were seated at their table when Lans’ friend began to feel sick, rushing to the bathroom and remaining there for what Lans estimates was 15 minutes. Texting him from the restroom, the friend said she was afraid of throwing up or worse, and “didn’t have the appetite to eat a full meal.”
So, they informed their waiter that she had become sick and left without ordering.
Lans expressed his shock and frustration that he and his friend were charged a $25 cancellation fee despite showing up for their reservation.
“Fast forward to today, she checks her credit card statement and sees that she was charged the $25 cancellation fee,” he said.
Upon calling the restaurant to inquire about the charge, the establishment informed her that the fee wasn’t just for canceling. In fact, they claimed to have 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 Lans, the restaurant claimed that the policy is in place to protect against loss of “revenue” for the business should someone show up and not spend money.
“But then I’m reading over this policy, looking at the fine print, and there is nothing about a ‘minimum spend,’” claimed Lans, who expressed his frustration with the discrepancy of policy and doesn’t “see how that’s enforceable.”
In the comments, viewers were divided over whether Lans’ party should pay the fee.
“It’s a cancellation fee, not a minimum spend fee,” one viewer scoffed.
“If they didn’t have it in their policy, they can’t legally charge the fee,” another claimed. “I get it, but they need to have it in writing for it to stand.”
“If a restaurant can’t stay open with food profits alone they shouldn’t be in business anyway,” someone else said.
“They shouldn’t have charged as a courtesy. Clearly here, there were mitigating circumstances,” one user chimed in.
Others, however, disagreed.
“Showing up and not spending money and then leaving is actually worse than canceling,” argued one person. “You’re canceling in person as late as you possibly can.”
“Yeah, leaving is no different than a cancellation,” another commented.
“You canceled in person, bro,” quipped someone else.
“Actually on the restaurant’s side,” one user said. “These places have Cancellation Fees because they lose out on valuable business holding the table for you only for you to not spend money.”
