iFood is condemned for causing an elderly woman to waste time trying to resolve a delivery error. Screenshots show the conversation between a 63-year-old woman from Itanhaém, on the coast of São Paulo, and iFood support during the customer's attempts to prove that she did not receive a purchase made through the app. The case was taken to court and resulted in the company being sentenced to pay R$5,000 for moral damages and the return of R$80 spent on the order. In the court decision, the judges understood that the consumer wasted time trying to resolve a problem caused by a delivery failure. In a statement, iFood stated that it respects the decisions of the Judiciary and will adopt the necessary measures to comply with the court order. "The company remains committed to the continuous improvement of its processes and the best experience for its users." ?Click here to follow the g1 Santos channel on WhatsApp. Conversations At 8:13 am on January 5, 2025, the customer informed the establishment that she would pick up the order at the condominium entrance. Around 7:45 hours later, the delivery man sent a message saying he was at the address. Security camera images, however, show that he left without leaving the shopping. Upon realizing that the order had been marked as delivered, the consumer contacted iFood support at 8:42 pm, informing that she verified through the cameras that the driver left the place without making the delivery. Even so, the platform responded that the order had been completed with the customer's confirmation code. See the conversation Customer contacted the store advising that their orders would be collected on site. Reproduction/Personal Archive ? iFood: The delivery code, which is personal, was provided at the time of delivery to confirm receipt of the order. ? iFood: Therefore, we have analyzed the situation and it will not be possible to cancel your order. ? Customer: As I said, I have footage of the entrance that was not delivered, he knows the code and could have put it, here in my building no one knows my code and I wasn't there at the time he was here. The consumer contested the information and stated that she never shared the code with anyone. She also reported again that she had images that proved that the delivery man had not left the purchases. Customer challenged delivery of Ifood before going to court. Reproduction/Personal Archive Despite the explanation, the platform maintained its decision and informed that it would not cancel the order. Process In court, the client requested the return of the amount paid and R$ 15 thousand for moral damages. In the first instance, he only got the right to a refund. Her defense appealed the decision and guaranteed payment of R$5,000 for wear and tear. In the process, iFood claimed to be merely an intermediary between commerce and the consumer. The company also maintained that the delivery man waited at the location for 15 minutes before leaving (in the image below, he appears leaning against the vehicle). iFood is condemned for causing an elderly woman to waste time trying to resolve a delivery error Reproduction The appeal was analyzed by the 26th Chamber of Private Law of the TJ-SP. The case's rapporteur, judge Morais Pucci, assessed that the time wasted by the elderly woman to gather evidence and try to solve the problem constitutes a "productive deviation". The other judges followed the rapporteur's vote. “When the consumer is compelled to waste [his time] on inefficient services and repeated protocols to solve a problem that did not cause it, failing to use it in work activities, leisure, family life or rest, compensable moral damage is constituted”, highlighted Pucci. VIDEOS: g1 in 1 minute Santos