Where a contract, a request, or a legal notice actually goes
Three real things: a contract still under review, getting the data processing agreement reviewed or signed, and a legal notice arriving from outside — a subpoena, a preservation request, something served on Dohos that touches a specific restaurant's data. Below: not a description of the process — the shape of it, quoted directly.
READ BY A PERSON · NO RESPONSE-TIME FIGURE EXISTS, SO NONE IS PROMISED
When legal process may concern a restaurant's data
We received legal process that may concern Customer Data processed for [verified Restaurant]. Subject to law and any nondisclosure restriction, Dohos is notifying you and requests [instruction/coordination] by [deadline]. Dohos has preserved [scope] and has not produced data [if true]. Dohos will assess its direct duties independently and will not disclose another tenant's data.
The last sentence is worth reading twice. Whatever a matter requires, it stays scoped to the account it's about — a request touching one restaurant's data is never a reason to look at, or disclose, another's.
When Dohos asks a restaurant to preserve records
Under [contract/legal basis], preserve [specific records/systems/date scope] for matter [ID] and confirm by [date] the controls applied, custodians/systems covered, automatic deletion suspended, backup limitations, and contact. Do not disclose the matter beyond authorized personnel or produce data to Dohos until separately instructed. Notify us of conflicts, legal restrictions, cost, or risk immediately.
Narrow by design — a specific scope, a specific matter, an explicit instruction not to go further than what's asked. A preservation request is never a blank authorization to hand data over; it's a request to hold something specific until the separate question of disclosure is actually resolved.
When Dohos itself is served
Dohos acknowledges receipt of [document/request description] on [date/time]. This acknowledgment does not confirm valid service, jurisdiction, authority, possession, responsiveness, legal sufficiency, or agreement to the requested deadline. Please direct further communications to [counsel-controlled verified channel] and do not send credentials or unrelated personal data.
Receiving something and agreeing it's valid are two different acts, kept separate on purpose. Confirming a document arrived concedes nothing about service, authority, or timeline.
Direct notice to a restaurant, where the law permits it
Dohos received [type of legal process] concerning [scope] on [date] and [preserved/produced/no production yet] [facts]. A copy or details are [provided/withheld for stated lawful reason]. Contact your counsel; Dohos cannot provide legal advice.
That last line matters as much as the rest. Dohos can describe what arrived and what happened with it; it doesn't, and can't, tell a restaurant what to do about it legally. That's what a restaurant's own counsel is for, and the notice says so directly rather than quietly overstepping into advice.
Separately from anything arriving from outside, this is where getting the data processing agreement reviewed or signed starts. There's no self-serve way to execute it today — a deliberate scope decision tied to real gaps still open in the agreement itself, not a missing feature. The DPA page covers what the agreement does, the roles it assigns, and exactly what's unfinished; the full clause-by-clause text a lawyer would read is at the agreement itself.
An individual asking about their own personal data — access, correction, or deletion — has a dedicated path: rights request, with verification proportionate to what's asked and a human-reviewed decision. This page is for Dohos's legal-process mechanism and contract questions on behalf of a restaurant or its counsel; a caller or diner's own request is a different relationship with a different real process already built for it.
Is anything on this page legal advice?
No. The quoted lines show how Dohos communicates in these situations; they aren't a substitute for a restaurant's own counsel, and the fourth one says so explicitly.
What if we don't have a matter ID or exact details?
Write in with whatever's actually known — a matter ID, a deadline, or a specific reference isn't required just to start the conversation.
Is this the same as the security door?
No — a security report or a question about how something's protected belongs at security. This page is for a contract, a DPA request, or legal process — something that arrived through an actual legal channel rather than a technical one.
Does writing in replace working with our own lawyer?
No, and nothing here implies it should. Your own counsel advises on what a matter means for you; this page is where the conversation with Dohos about it starts.
The engraved fine print itself lives at /legal — every agreement, current and archived, with its own draft status stated plainly. For a live account question that isn't a legal matter, the help section is the faster read.