Los Angeles, California – A downtown restaurant in Los Angeles has instituted a “security charge” on its customers’ bills, sparking discussion about unexpected surcharges becoming more prevalent. Perch, a popular rooftop bar and restaurant near Pershing Square, includes an extra 4.5% fee on all checks to ensure the safety of its staff and guests, according to a Perch employee named Melody Lin. The restaurant’s website states that the charge remains with the establishment to cover safety and security resources.
The attention to this fee was first drawn by a Reddit post from a user named “Individual-Schemes,” which raised questions about its necessity and specific amount. The post argued that security services are typically an included expense in rent payments for downtown buildings, requesting clarification on the reasoning behind the 4.5% charge.
Last year, lawmakers in California passed Senate Bill 478 in an effort to prohibit surprise charges on consumer bills. This law, which will go into effect on July 1, applies to all businesses operating in the state and aims to prevent advertising or offering prices for goods and services that do not include mandatory fees or charges. However, there remains debate about whether this law applies to restaurants. Even within the office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta, one of the bill’s sponsors, there are differing opinions on whether restaurants must disclose their fees or incorporate them into the overall prices on their menus.
A spokeswoman for Senator Nancy Skinner, co-author of the bill, previously stated that the legislation permits restaurants to include disclosed service fees on their menus. Representatives from the attorney general’s office also suggested that the law does not eliminate fees altogether but rather mandates their disclosure. However, conflicting statements from the attorney general’s office indicate that fees should be included in menu prices, not simply disclosed.
Matthew Sutton, Senior Vice President of Government Affairs and Public Policy for the California Restaurant Association, emphasized that if the law is correctly applied, it should not result in increased menu prices. Sutton stated that courts have consistently ruled that restaurant menus are not considered advertisements and that restaurants do not provide goods or services.
The Golden Gate Restaurant Association has requested clarification from the attorney general’s office regarding how SB 478 will impact its members. While guidelines are expected to be published prior to July 1, uncertainty remains about whether charges such as surcharges or service charges will be banned or if clearer disclosure at the beginning of the purchasing process will be sufficient to comply with the law.
Customers have expressed dissatisfaction with the implementation of the security charge at Perch. One customer, Earnest Traylor, called the idea of paying for the restaurant’s security fee “crazy” in an interview with KTLA-TV.
The attorney general’s guidelines for SB 478 could potentially diminish service charges on restaurant bills, making them insignificant compared to the increased prices listed on menus. Alternatively, the guidelines may allow restaurants to impose various surcharges as long as they are adequately disclosed in the menus prior to customers placing their orders. Violating the new law could prove costly for restaurants, with penalties amounting to at least $1,000 per violation.