Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Business
Anna Tims

Waitrose won’t fork out after its meatball broke my tooth

Posed picture of someone eating meatballs from a plastic container
A meatball from Waitrose contained shards of bone that broke a tooth. Photograph: Alamy

In July last year, my husband cracked a tooth on lamb meatballs from Waitrose. It had to be extracted at a cost of £160. Waitrose asked us to return the remains of the product and advised that shards of bone had been found. There was an apology in writing, and we were asked to submit evidence of costs. Months of to-ing and fro-ing ensued. In May, we were told that, as my husband was now considering a dental implant, a solicitor would progress our claim. We have just heard from the solicitor that, as the product was supplied by a third party, we need to pursue the manufacturer. It has taken Waitrose 11 months to conclude it has nothing to do with them.
SB, Bridgwater, Somerset

This is disgraceful. Waitrose’s initial letter clearly implied it would reimburse you. Only when it realised your dentist had recommended an implant costing £3,335 did it take fright and pass the buck. The solicitor’s letter claims that, since Waitrose could not have inspected a sealed packet before sale, it was not at fault. That ignores the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which obliges retailers to provide redress for a faulty product, regardless of whether they are to blame. It’s true, in cases of personal injury, you can also claim against the manufacturer under the Consumer Protection Act 1987, but Waitrose should have pointed you down that path at the outset.

According to consumer law expert Gary Rycroft, from solicitors Joseph A Jones, Waitrose should have paid up, then sought to recover the money from the manufacturer. “I have sympathy with Waitrose, saying the manufacturer is also liable, because, in law, that is correct,” he says. “But that is diminished due to Waitrose, in effect acknowledging their legal duty to their customer, then seeking to backtrack. That is disingenuous.”

Waitrose swiftly apologised and agreed to stump up £4,000 after I questioned its behaviour. It tells me customer service passes cases on to its insurer when a claim exceeds a certain value. Basically, it leaves the consumer to do the heavy lifting.

Email your.problems@observer.co.uk. Include an address and phone number. Submission and publication are subject to our terms and conditions

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.