We recently reported on an issue where a customer was refused an order placed through courier service app, Glovo, due to the restaurant KFC having an exclusivity agreement with hipMenu.
View Original Article
The Glovo courier arrived to the customer, with a half-completed order, and informed that the order was not completed in full, because he worked for Glovo, and KFC only accept orders through hipMenu.
We reached out to both KFC and hipMenu for comments, and although one of hipMenu’s representatives, confirmed that the restaurant’s agreement with hipMenu meant that they shouldn’t provide delivery services through another courier, hipMenu’s team responded that in fact, there is no exclusivity agreement in place, which would have resulted in the KFC staff from refusing to serve the Glovo courier and fulfilling the order.
The carefully-worded hipMenu response can be read in full below, and encourages us to contact KFC for their statement on this incident, however, so far, they have not returned any messages.
As initially reported, such practices to refuse the sale of goods, unless made through an exclusive courier, would have likely breached European Competition Laws.
On the basis of the response from hipMenu, and through lack of comment from KFC (U.S. FOOD NETWORK S.A), it is deemed that the refusal of service on the basis that the Glovo courier was performing his duties as a courier service, should not have happened and KFC did not have grounds to refuse the order.
We have still not received any response from KFC via their official Facebook Page, and have therefore reached out to the US team via their website to check whether they would be able to provide any comment with regards to KFC practices in Romania, and the basis on which a refusal of service can be made.