Ordering meals via food delivery platforms has become a daily routine for many. Nevertheless, the Consumer Council has often received complaints regarding services provided by food delivery platforms in recent years. Apart from late deliveries, missing or incorrect items, and food spillage, the Council has also received complaints regarding refusal to compensate for delivery delays, refund declined for cancellations made within 1 minute of ordering, and misleading “self-pickup” options at restaurants with no physical outlet, etc. These issues reflected that food delivery platforms have much room for improvement in terms of their dispute handling processes and oversight of business mode/status of restaurants. When consumers come across “no refunds for cancelled orders” situations, it depends on whether the restaurant has already accepted the order. However, consumers have no way of knowing the restaurant’s order acceptance or meal preparation status, rendering the cancellation and refund mechanism ineffectual. Therefore, the Council urges food delivery platforms to provide clear definitions of “order accepted” and “order ready for delivery”, etc., to protect consumers from losing both their meals and their money.
While the Council acknowledges the fierce competition within the food delivery industry, it stresses that competitive pricing must be matched by reliable delivery and customer service. The Council urges platforms to enhance service quality and improve information transparency of their systems by providing real-time status updates on order acceptance and preparation, so as to enable consumers to make informed decisions. The Council also recommends the industry to reference practices from other markets and to consider establishing mechanisms to allow cancellations and refunds within a reasonable time window. Not only would this improve service flexibility and provide a more pleasant consumption experience, but it could also better protect consumer rights.
Case 1: System Errors and Inaccurate Delivery Time Records
Compensation Denied at One Point
The complainant ordered food via Platform A, which showed an estimated delivery time of 20-30 minutes. The order still had not arrived after 45 minutes, yet the app marked it as “delivered”, so the complainant contacted the delivery person to enquire about the situation. The delivery person sent the complainant a photo as proof of having delivered the food, but the location shown in the photo was not her place of residence. Subsequently, a customer service representative from Platform A called the complainant proactively, explaining that the meal was still at the restaurant and a new delivery person would be arranged. After the call, however, the complainant noticed that the app had already updated the order status to “completed”, hence she contacted Platform A again to confirm the delivery status and ultimately received the meal after a 1-hour delay. Afterwards, the complainant noticed that Platform A had not issued a HK$120 coupon promised under its delay compensation policy. Platform A claimed that, according to its system, the meal was delivered within 15 minutes of the estimated time and therefore was not eligible for compensation. Although the complainant provided a record of the conversation with the customer service representative as proof, Platform A insisted its records were correct and said it could not investigate the incident further, only offering a HK$25 coupon as compensation. The complainant rejected this offer and requested to immediately cancel her paid membership, which was also denied. As a result, she sought assistance from the Council.
Following the Council’s intervention, Platform A re-examined the order and agreed to issue compensation in the form of a HK$120 coupon according to its delay compensation policy. The complainant confirmed receipt of the coupon and the case was resolved.
Case 2: Order Cancelled Within 1 Minute Yet Refund Was Denied Claiming Food Had Been Prepared
After placing an order on Platform B, the complainant realised he had ordered the wrong food items, so he requested cancellation and refund within 1 minute after submitting the order. However, Platform B denied the refund merely 3 minutes after the cancellation request, claiming that the restaurant had already prepared the food, at the same time also refusing to deliver the cancelled order. 7 minutes after cancelling the order on Platform B, the complainant managed to contact the restaurant and requested to cancel the order, but the restaurant offered an ambiguous reply and referred him back to the platform. The complainant discovered later that according to Platform B’s terms and conditions, applications for cancellations and refunds are allowed if the restaurant has not yet accepted the order. The complainant opined that since only 1 minute had lapsed between placing and cancelling the order, he should be eligible for a refund, and therefore requested one. However, Platform B responded that the restaurant had already prepared the food and a refund could not be arranged. Finding the claim of having prepared the food within 3 minutes unreasonable, the complainant requested proof of food preparation from Platform B, but received no response. He thus resorted to filing a complaint with the Council.
In its response to the Council’s enquiry, Platform B emphasised that the restaurant had already accepted the order and begun preparing the ingredients, and that it is the customer’s responsibility to ensure the details are correct before placing the order. On this basis, the platform cited its policy to deny the refund request. Platform B also declined the complainant’s request to provide proof of food preparation, citing the information as internal business data of the restaurant. Since both parties were unable to reach an agreement, the Council recommended the consumer to consider seeking legal advice before deciding whether to pursue the matter further.
Case 3: “Self-pickup” Option Offered at a Non-existent Storefront
Complainant Unable to Collect Ordered Food
The complainant ordered from Restaurant D via Platform C using the “self-pickup” option. Upon arriving at the listed address in a shopping mall, the consumer found that the restaurant did not exist, and thus was unable to collect his order. Attempts to contact the restaurant also failed as the listed phone number was invalid, and Platform C claimed it could not reach the restaurant either. The complainant requested a refund from Platform C, but the platform refused a refund on the ground that the restaurant had already accepted the order, instead offering only a HK$10 voucher as compensation. The complainant opined that the food delivery platform should be responsible for verifying the operational status of its partner restaurants, and therefore filed a complaint with the Council against both Platform C and Restaurant D, requesting service improvements and a refund.
The Council contacted Platform C and Restaurant D to mediate the issue. Restaurant D responded that it operates exclusively online and does not have a physical outlet. It had since updated its contact number and requested Platform C to remove the “self-pickup” option to prevent similar incidents. Platform C confirmed to the Council that a full refund had been issued to the complainant, thereby resolving the case.
Tips for consumers when using food delivery platforms:
- Check details carefully before submitting the order, including food items, quantities, prices, delivery or pickup location and time, as well as coupon validity dates. Before confirming the order, take screenshots of the order details, estimated time of delivery, etc. for record of evidence;
- Monitor the order status after placing an order. If the order is marked as “completed” but not received, contact the platform and the restaurant immediately to check the food preparation and delivery status;
- Consumers who wish to cancel an order after placing it should note that once the restaurant has accepted the order and started preparing the meal, cancellation may not be eligible for a refund. Additionally, once an order is cancelled, it normally cannot be reinstated, and the platform will not arrange delivery;
- Keep record of issues encountered, such as incorrect or missing items, damaged packaging, or spillage, with photos and receipts, and report them to the food delivery platform as soon as possible and send them the relevant proof;
- Currently, some food delivery platforms do not offer customer service hotlines, relying instead on online or email support. If unable to reach them through these channels, consumers may contact the Council for assistance.
Download the article (Chinese only): https://ccchoice.org/584-complaint
Consumer Council reserves all its right (including copyright) in respect of CHOICE magazine and Online CHOICE.