A customer who suffered a broken dental crown after biting into a Waitrose chicken wrap has been left with a £760 bill. The incident occurred a couple of months ago when the customer bit down on a hard, white object in the wrap, which felt like stone and caused significant pain.
Waitrose investigated the foreign object, identifying it as a bone. The supermarket stated that a warning on the packaging about potential bones meant it was not liable for the incident. The customer was subsequently sent a £4 voucher as compensation, which she found to be an insulting offer. When she requested the foreign object back for independent testing, the supermarket returned a small piece of meat instead and refused to provide a copy of its investigation report.
Sally Hamilton, writing for the Daily Mail's 'Sally Sorts It' column, noted that the customer had already initiated legal action against Waitrose in the small claims court by the time she sought assistance. This legal action complicated the investigation into the incident.
Waitrose stated it was "factually inaccurate" to suggest the customer was silenced by its lawyers and declined to comment on the legal action or its outcome. A spokesperson for the supermarket said, "We’re very sorry to hear about our customer’s experience. We have the highest standards of quality and a robust, tried-and-tested approach in the event a product is returned to us for investigation."
Hamilton advised that customers facing similar issues should be aware of their consumer rights, citing the Consumer Protection Act 1987, which holds manufacturers and sellers strictly liable for personal injuries caused by defective products, and the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which mandates that goods must be of satisfactory quality and fit for purpose. She cautioned against accepting low-value vouchers as a final resolution, as this could be interpreted as acceptance of the complaint's resolution. For claims involving damage, such as to teeth, evidence is crucial. This includes keeping receipts, packaging, food remains, the foreign object itself, and photographic evidence of any damage, along with dental treatment records and bills. Hamilton suggested that with comprehensive evidence, customers have a better chance of pursuing a successful claim.
In a separate case, a customer ordered a portable air conditioner from B&Q for £959 in July, which was arranged for delivery via DPD. However, the unit never arrived, despite the customer being home. DPD claimed delivery, but stated the item went to another address. B&Q and DPD were unable to locate the item, and B&Q ultimately provided a full refund as a goodwill gesture, although the customer felt a refund for a non-received item was a matter of right rather than goodwill. Consumer law dictates that the retailer is responsible for ensuring the item reaches the customer, and must either replace it or issue a refund if it is lost, damaged, or delayed.