Man Sues 1-800-Flowers for Uncovering Affair

Posted by wizeGurl (6907 views) Add this story to MyYahoo Add this article to del.icio.us Submit article to Reddit Add story to Furl Add story to StumbleUpon [E-Mail link]


A married man is suing 1-800-Flowers for $1 million for revealing that he was cheating on his wife. Just deserts? Sheer stupidity? Or the worst customer service ever?

It's not as if the man didn't take reasonable precautions. He asked 1-800-Flowers to keep his purchase private, and was referred to their privacy policy, which states that customers can ask 1-800-Flowers not to share personal information with "third parties."

When 1-800-Flowers sent the man a thank-you note to his home, his wife...with whom he was already going through divorce proceedings...contacted them and got them to send her a fax of the receipt for the dozen roses...which included the note, "Just wanted to say that I love you and you mean the world to me!" When the roses failed to appear at her door, that's when things got ugly.

Although the wife and her husband had already basically agreed to an amicable parting of ways, the receipt changed things, and she is now demanding a settlement of $300,000 in addition to the child support they had previously agreed upon.

Is it just me, or is it a little teeny bit naive to assume that the husband you are in the process of divorcing should keep himself more faithful and pure than over 50% of married, non-divorcing men?

Regardless of what you think of the man's technical infidelity, the real issue here is privacy. When a company you do business with has a policy to protect your privacy, is it hunky-dory for them to violate that policy? What if you offend them in some way? Say, if you're cheating on your wife, or if they don't like your politics, or if they don't like the look of your face? Then would it be okay for them to break their stated policies without repercussions?

Despite the belief by some religions that husband and wife are "one flesh," they are clearly considered separate legal entities under US law. Happily faxing a receipt to a third party, especially when the customer went out of his way to request that his transaction not be shared with other parties, is a clear violation.

This time, it's Horndog LeRoy. Next time, it could be you, and it could be your purchase of anti-Bush paraphernalia on Cafepress being shared with your Republican boss, or your purchase of gro-lights being shared with your redneck sheriff neighbor, or your subscription to Boy's World being shared with your minister, or more likely, your congregation...you get the idea.

Details.

 

 

Comments

 
Name: (change name for anonymous posting)
Title:
Comments:
   

1 Article displayed.

Pursuant to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC § 230), BSAlert is a user-contributed editorial web site and does not endorse any specific content, but merely acts as a "sounding board" for the online community. Any and all quoted material is referenced pursuant to "Fair Use" (17 U.S.C. § 107). Like any information resource, use your own judgement and seek out the facts and research and make informed choices.

Powered by Percleus (c) 2005-2047 - Content Management System

[Percleus 0.9.4] (c) 2005, PCS