LETTER SENT TO SINGAPORE ACADEMY OF LAW ON 3 SEPTEMBER 2008
I had lunch this week with a friend at the Academy Bistro at the Supreme Court.
I had ordered chicken as the main course. About five minutes into the main course, I realised the meat was uncooked and bloody.
I sought the waiter's assistance and requested that the problem be rectified. The waiter said he will have the chef look into the matter. The same piece of chicken merely came back reheated.
I was then asked a second time if the food was okay. Unfortunately, the meat remained bloody. I made this known to the waiter but proceeded to complete the rest of the main course without eating the bloody parts.
Following the incident, the waiter on duty made it a point to apologise three times. This is commendable. First, when I first complained that the chicken was bloody. Second, when the main course was re-served and the waiter checked if everything was okay. Third, when I left the restaurant.
Saying sorry is only one aspect of service recovery. The overall service recovery attempt leaves much room for improvement.
Prices at the Academy Bistro are relatively high, if compared to restaurants of similar standing. At such a restaurant, the food would not have been reheated. A new dish would have been duly served.
If the new dish had still been unsatisfactory, an offer could have been made to either waive the charge for the particular course or the whole bill.
I hope corrective and preventive actions can be taken to address such situations.
The Academy Bistro feeds the legal fraternity. It is also host to many guests of the legal fraternity. Above all, it enjoys a privileged space in the iconic Supreme Court building.
It must therefore observe the high standards that one would expect from a valued member of the legal fraternity.
Please consider the environment - do you really need to print this?