Couple forced to cancel their holiday after being charged £3,300 for a Starbucks

1176     0
Couple forced to cancel their holiday after being charged £3,300 for a Starbucks
Couple forced to cancel their holiday after being charged £3,300 for a Starbucks

A couple was jolted awake when Starbucks drained $4,000 (£3,295) from their bank account for two coffees - which prevented them from going on holiday.

Jesse O'Dell ordered a venti caramel frappucino for himself and an iced Americano for his wife, thinking the damage would run to around $10 (£8.24).

But after failing to immediately check his receipt, he didn't realise that the Tulsa outlet had charged a whopping $4,456.27 for the two cups of joe.

It wasn't until his wife Deedee's card was declined at a mall that they realised the cash they'd put aside for a trip to visit wife Deedee's native Thailand had been ground down.

The couple said they spent all day contacting the coffee chain, who eventually told them they were sending out a batch of checks to make up the incorrect charge.

Greggs, Costa & Pret coffees have 'huge differences in caffeine', says report qhidquiqrkirhinvGreggs, Costa & Pret coffees have 'huge differences in caffeine', says report

Has a company dented your bank balance by overcharging you? Please get in touch.. [email protected]

Couple forced to cancel their holiday after being charged £3,300 for a StarbucksJesse O’Dell was charged $4,456.27 for a coffee order at Starbucks

But the checks bounced, the couple says. Starbucks says the checks have been delivered to the couple and cashed in.

Jesse told the New York Post: "We contacted their customer service helpline probably 30 to 40 times that day."

Starbucks blamed the issue on a typo, but also heaped the fault at the feet of the couple, saying that Jesse had submitted a massive tip when placing the small order.

Couple forced to cancel their holiday after being charged £3,300 for a StarbucksStarbucks blamed the issue on a typo

Jesse denies adding the tip and claims he was told a district manager said the charge was caused by a network issue.

“I know how to press buttons. I didn’t press that button,” he told McClatchy News. “If it wasn’t the barista then it’s definitely your network, which is a really big issue.”

A complaint has been filed with police in Tulsa before officers closed the case when the checks were delivered.

Couple forced to cancel their holiday after being charged £3,300 for a StarbucksJesse said being overcharged meant he and his wife didn't have funds to visit her family in Thailand

Jesse and Deedee were furious because they were forced to cancel a "non-refundable" family holiday to Thailand to visit Deedee's relatives.

“This is something that has caused duress in our family and hopefully others don’t have to go through something like this,” he said.

In May last year, a pair of Brit tourists were left speechless after being charged more than £500 for two drinks and some snacks at a Greek restaurant.

Costa Coffee cappuccino has four times the amount of caffeine as a Red BullCosta Coffee cappuccino has four times the amount of caffeine as a Red Bull

The mum and her 19-year-old daughter refused to pay the eye-watering bill only to be blocked from leaving by male staff members.

Couple forced to cancel their holiday after being charged £3,300 for a StarbucksThe staggering cost came from a whopping $4444 (£3763) tip

According to the pair they had ordered two cocktails and a portion of crab legs, while sitting in some deck chairs for a few hours.

But when the bill came it showed they were being charged €520 with a €78 tip.

Complaining about the huge bill, the woman told her travel agent: “We spent a beautiful day at the beach but please, warn your future customers that the restaurant-bar we visited, charged us €600 for two cocktails and a portion of crab legs.

“While we knew that the bill would not exceed €200, suddenly they asked us to pay €600!"

She added that they did use the deckchairs for three hours but didn't understand how it could have cost so much.

Ryan Fahey

Print page

Comments:

comments powered by Disqus