A Redlands family is suing Starbucks after their 2-year-old girl drank a beverage from the popular establishment allegedly containing a barista’s blood.
Frish Law Group narrated that the family composed of Amanda Vice, her husband Louis Vice and his mother Rhonda Agles ordered several drinks from a Starbucks outlet at 601 W.2nd Street in San Bernardino on February 6, 2016. The lawsuit says that when the family came home, they noticed a strange red smear on the side of one of the cups and the drink had a “strong metallic smell”. Another cup that was shared by a family member and the young girl also had the same red stain.
Amanda said that the blood only became apparent once they drank from the cups. She said:”Once we drank it, then we could see on the inside of the rim that there was blood.” She added that the worse thing was her daughter was even licking the lid, and eating whipped cream from the cup.
The family was certain none of them was bleeding. They called the coffee shop to report the odd incident. The lawsuit says that after making the call, the family discovered that an employee had been bleeding and had been removed from the floor.
The store manager only offered the family free drinks for a week to compensate for the contaminated beverages. The family, however, wanted the employee to get a blood test to determine if he or she was HIV positive or had any other communicable disease.
The law firm’s statement emphasized that the family went through much stress and agony having their own blood tests taken, especially excruciating for the young girl, and then restlessly waiting for the results.
Blood tests came back negative for any disease, but the family still need to undergo a re-test six months later to make sure.
The family underscored the aggravation they went through especially the fear of getting sick from someone else’s blood mixed into their drinks.
Starbucks offered $1,000 to each family member after the incident. The family’s attorney Stan Pekler declined and said the offer “does not begin to compensate the family for suffered injuries and damages for which Starbucks is liable.”
The lawsuit against the coffee giant seeks damages because of the company’s failure to warn the family, negligence, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, battery, assault, negligent hiring and negligent training and supervision.