When to send a dish back to the kitchen?

[Burholme06]

A thread in the Old City sub-forum inspired me to start this thread.


What are people’s standards for sending food back?



In my opinion, since the food cannot be reused, such as a pair of jean from Macy’s, it would seem that not liking it that much or wishing that was less greasy, more spicy, less crispy, etc., for ones individual and subjective taste, is not grounds to send a dish back.

My standard would be that it’s not edible or dangerous to eat – rotten, raw, rancid, etc.


Any people in food service business want to comment on what should and shouldn't be fair game?

[Sycamore]

I've only sent food back a handful of times, if that. Each time, it was because something was wrong with the dish, not because I merely didn't care for it. I can recall one time for very undercooked fish, and once for finding a bird feather in my salad.

[ACG]

I have not sent much back, it really has to be an issue where I just can not eat it as it is served.
I remember a couple times. Chicken tortilla soup is my all time fave, but once it was so salty (and I am not overly sensitive to salt or anything), I just could not eat it.
If food has sat so long waiting to be served that it has cooled and that affects the taste and enjoyment of what the dish should be (some stuff is just as fine at room temp as hot, some stuff not so much), I have sent that back. Luckily I don't think that has happen more than twice.

[Salad Days]

If something isn't cooked the way you ask for it, you should send it back. A good restaurant should realize their error and correct it for you.

Also, I agree with the temperature comment; or if you find a bug in your food (happened to me once).

[JugglerDave]

When you order a $30-or-higher steak medium-rare, and it comes out medium-well.

[Burholme06]

When you order a $30-or-higher steak medium-rare, and it comes out medium-well.

I got into the habit years ago of ordering my steak rare. Medium rare used to be my preference but I found that slightly overcooked (medium) was a much worse outcome than undercooked (rare). Now my steak comes out either rare or medium rare, which is great. Based on how far they missed with your steak, my method probably wouldn't have helped either.

[Marc]

I assume that
a) someone in the back will do something untoward to my food*, and
b) I will be out of sync with my dining partner(s)

If the the problem with the dish is more egregious than the above, then I send it back, otherwise I keep it. I may or may not mention the problem and/or begrudge the place for how they do/don't handle it.


*I don't really believe this most of the time, but I assume it for purposes of the CBA.

[BeardScraper]

while in college and working as a line cook i had some experience dealing with dishes being returned to the kitchen. from the cook's standpoint, i would always understand if the food was undercooked or overcooked. but there were sometimes when a dish would get sent back and there really just seemed that nothing was wrong with it. that is when the impure thoughts would arise. one time a guy sent a bowl of chowder back and said that it was not hot enough. it was friggin steaming! i ended up nuking it in the microwave until it was boiling.

[OldCityTans]

NEVER send anything back. If you don't like it, don't eat it, and make sure they know you're not eating because its no good... but NEVER send it back.

[desolate]

NEVER send anything back. If you don't like it, don't eat it, and make sure they know you're not eating because its no good... but NEVER send it back.

yes, never ever send it back. Complain, then leave.


I've only once thought about it. My steak was too rare.

Then it came back nucleated. I left. On my Birthday. I wasn't even paying.

because I worked in restaurants.



L

[Freckles]

I only sent food back once - when there was a hair in it

I was a server for 10 years, and never did anything untoward when food was sent back (except maybe overheat it as someone above mentioned).

[Eames]

So much about how food is prepared and tastes is subjective. Sending it back implies that it can somehow be fixed in the kitchen. I'd never send it back because I didn't like the taste, or the ingredients, as long as they were consistent with menu descriptions; what do you expect the chef to do about that? Sending back (to me) is reserved for kitchen errors.

Under or over cooking, by a significant degree-- not 'rare' vs. 'medium-rare', but I'm talking about 'well-done' vs. 'rare' or vice versa-- is grounds for a send back. It can be corrected, by cooking more, or starting over and cooking it less. Significant over/under cooking is just carelessness and shouldn't be tolerated. But, just because 'you don't like something,' falls into the caveat emptor category. The first time I ate at Morimoto, I tried skate for the first time in my life. Turned out I didn't like anything at all about it. It was not improperly prepared. I just didn't eat it, since I took responsibility for ordering something I had no clue about. Although the server, seeing I hadn't eaten it did ask why and offered to bring out something else.

Wrong items are also grounds for a send back. If I order a salad with vinegrette dressing and they bring it out with 1000 Island, back it goes, because it can be fixed.

So too are items misrepresented on the menu grounds for a send back. I ordered a chicken dish at a Vietnamese restaurant because the menu description said "chunks of white meat chicken" and when I got it, it was mixed, white and dark. Back it went in exchange for another item.

I don't recall if I've ever done it, but food being room temp that should be served hot would also be grounds for a send back. It would mean that it's been sitting around too long. However, I don't think that warm food should be sent back just because an individual has some abnormal penchant for roof of the mouth burning food.

[JasonMcElroy]

It seems there are two issues at play here. . . under what conditions does something require corrective action and what is your desired remedy.

I agree with others that only when something is wrong (cooked incorrectly, incorrect ingredients, inedible or dangerous) should the diner take action. Sending something back because you didn't like it is ridiculous. Especially considering the detailed descriptions most restaurants provide for their dishes.

When something is wrong with my meal, I'm usually not inclined to send it back. The occasion/item is already ruined due to timing issues (having your dinner companion eat without you or wait for the replacement dish to arrive) or due to loss of appetite for the incorrect item (bad, raw). I usually just ask the server to remove the item from the check politely and without drama. If they ask the reason (you'd be surprised how many don't care) I tell them.

This approach works well in that it generally doesn't ruin the timing of the meal, or more importantly, the tone. Once the server/chef and the guest are at odds it's pretty much over and time to leave.

Jason

[phillysw]

Unless it's inedible, not what I ordered, or there's a foreign object in it, I will just not eat it and never go back to that establishment. I might say something to the waiter if I feel it's just terrible food, but I tend to be non-confrontational and assume it could just be my taste.

I've ordered veggie burgers...and gotten beef burgers. Definitely sent those back. Luckily in each case, I realized the error before taking a big bite.

Back when I ate meat at age 18, I decided to try pork at a nice restaurant--something I had never really eaten before. It was absolutely disgusting, so bland that I couldn't eat any of it. But since I'd never had pork before, I had nothing to compare it to.

[desolate]

It seems there are two issues at play here. . . under what conditions does something require corrective action and what is your desired remedy.

I agree with others that only when something is wrong (cooked incorrectly, incorrect ingredients, inedible or dangerous) should the diner take action. Sending something back because you didn't like it is ridiculous. Especially considering the detailed descriptions most restaurants provide for their dishes.

When something is wrong with my meal, I'm usually not inclined to send it back. The occasion/item is already ruined due to timing issues (having your dinner companion eat without you or wait for the replacement dish to arrive) or due to loss of appetite for the incorrect item (bad, raw). I usually just ask the server to remove the item from the check politely and without drama. If they ask the reason (you'd be surprised how many don't care) I tell them.

This approach works well in that it generally doesn't ruin the timing of the meal, or more importantly, the tone. Once the server/chef and the guest are at odds it's pretty much over and time to leave.

Jason

+1

[Polar Cub]

I only sent food back once - when there was a hair in it

You know the chef just picked the hair out with his hairy-knuckled, wart-encrusted fingers, then sent it back out to you with a new piece of parsley.

[Burholme06]

I ordered a chicken dish at a Vietnamese restaurant because the menu description said "chunks of white meat chicken" and when I got it, it was mixed, white and dark. Back it went in exchange for another item.

I agree with your severely over or under cooked meat and the salad dressing examples but the chicken thing is a bit picky IMO. Yes, it should be as the menu states but I would have eaten it and if it really bugged me, I would mention it to the waiter. It's not like they substituted beef or pork for the chicken.

[Das1978]

I have never sent food back, but i have sent beer and drinks back.

[snick33]

NEVER send anything back. If you don't like it, don't eat it, and make sure they know you're not eating because its no good... but NEVER send it back.

100% agreement

[OldCityTans]

You can totally see who has & hasn't worked in kitchens on this thread!