Beef Stew and Debt Collection – Part 2

Or debt collection in real life, practical tips for guests and restaurateurs

Stew at market price: When is expensive too expensive?

The previous part ended with whether the beef stew and lemonade menu costing 21,000 HUF can be considered strikingly disproportionate in value or not? According to settled judicial practice, a disparity in value can be established below/above a 30-50% deviation from market prices. Judging the question from an armchair is not easy. We can get beef stew in a roadside stand and in a Michelin-starred restaurant, where there will immediately be a difference of at least one zero between the prices. If we take a restaurant that can be called average, the 21,000 HUF seems to be at least a multiple overpricing. Based on this, the disparity in value can be established. It is another question that the restaurant will presumably not admit it, and getting involved in legal proceedings would be significantly more expensive. Therefore, the guest is likely better off paying and checking the menu next time.

Car keys and word of honor: How can later payment be guaranteed?

Let’s examine the other side too: what can the restaurateur do if the consumer guest does not wish to pay? In the specific case, they “politely” asked for his car keys as a pledge. However, it is worth being careful with this method. If the guest does not want to put up the keys to a car worth several million as a pledge for a few tens of thousands of forints voluntarily and happily, but some pressure occurs, then the restaurateur can easily become the subject of criminal proceedings. For example, due to coercion or vigilantism. In this case, the first legal consultation with a criminal colleague will cost more than the unpaid bill. The polite request should be taken literally and one should not enter into a situation where a crime may arise because of a few tens of thousands of forints.

Guests leaving without paying: The restaurateur’s toolkit

In case our restaurateur wants to act lawfully, then they politely (!) ask for the guest’s personal data. If they provide it, then debt collection can be initiated based on this. As long as they do not provide it, then a police officer must be requested and a mutual identification must be initiated. With reference to the fact that the restaurateur wants to enforce a legal claim. The police officer in this case will identify the parties and will submit the personal data at the station. (They cannot release it to the parties on the spot.) Following this, the guest must also be politely asked to be kind enough to settle the debt without delay. Should this not take place, then one can go to the station to request the data. In possession of the data, Doktor Utriusque can initiate the order for payment or other proceedings.

Summary and lessons

It is a fact that the legal path is slow and expensive – as usual – but lawful debt collection unfortunately works this way. Order for payment, if they contest it then civil litigation. If they do not pay voluntarily then enforcement proceedings. The “I’ll take” your watch, gold chain, car Wild West method is somewhat old-fashioned nowadays and based on the above, can easily end in a crime. Therefore, I would suggest to every restaurateur to refrain from this. They are better off leaving the debt collection to Doktor Utriusque.