|
Coffee Shop Talk of a non sexual Nature Visit Sam's Alfresco Heaven. Singapore's best Alfresco Coffee Experience! If you're up to your ears with all this Sex Talk and would like to take a break from it all to discuss other interesting aspects of life in Singapore, pop over and join in the fun. |
|
Thread Tools |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
CASE decides only to issue warning to BreadTalk
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
http://www.tremeritus.com/2015/08/09...-to-breadtalk/ CASE decides only to issue warning to BreadTalk August 9th, 2015 | Author: Editorial CASE has issued a stern warning to BreadTalk for repacking Yeo’s packet soya bean milk into BreadTalk bottles marked with the words “freshly prepared”, giving consumers the distinctly false impression that they are buying “freshly made” soya bean milk. The Chinese media had earlier reported a video clip of a staff from BreadTalk pouring pre-packed soya bean milk into bottles in one of their outlets, that went viral. The bottles are marked with the words “freshly prepared”, but they contain pre-packed soya bean milk. It caused an uproar. The BreadTalk Group apologised for the mis-description and claimed that it was a mistake. They explained that the “freshly prepared” mark on the bottles was originally designed for the outlet’s freshly prepared fruit juices. The staff had carelessly used the bottles meant for freshly prepared fruit juices. Seah Seng Choon, executive director of CASE, said: The questionable practice by BreadTalk is unacceptable. By indicating the words ‘freshly prepared’ on the bottles, consumers may reasonably be deceived or misled to believe that the soya bean milk was freshly brewed in-house and therefore commands a higher value than Yeo’s pre-packed soya bean milk. Under the CPFTA, the court may award the consumer damages in the amount of any loss or damage suffered by the consumer as a result of the said unfair practice. CASE warned that it would take action should such “flagrant breaches” continue. CASE has the authority to apply for court orders against errant retailers to stop unfair business practices. The apology posted by BreadTalk on its Facebook page reads as follows: Dear fans and loyal customers, We’ve heard your concerns over our soya bean beverage sold in stores. At BreadTalk, your feedback is important to us and we appreciate your input on how we may serve you better. As a global bakery chain, we source for quality ingredients and products from established and reputable third party suppliers around the world, including from renowned local brands to enrich the variety of products sold at our stores. We have been selling our vendor’s branded dispenser soya bean beverage at 22 of our outlets islandwide, with the vendor’s brand and product information clearly labelled for consumer knowledge and confidence. As part of our improvements to our product line up, the rest of the outlets are currently in the midst of transiting from bottle sales to the same vendor’s dispensing machines to convey greater clarity to you, our customers. We have heard your feedback about our bottled soya bean beverage. We would like to apologise for any misaligned presentation or wrong impressions created, and clarify that it is never our intention to mislead. We greatly appreciate your feedback and will continue to look into improving our product quality. BreadTalk Group connected to PAP people The BreadTalk Group is led by Dr George Quek, a prominent local businessman who speaks mostly Mandarin and very little English. The group owns the Din Tai Fung franchise, famous for its xiao long bao (steamed pork dumplings). It is a well-known fact that Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say loves the toothpicks from Din Tai Fung so much that he simply can’t have enough of them. BreadTalk’s board of directors includes Chan Soo Sen and Ong Kian Min, both ex-MPs from PAP. It is strange that CASE has decided to simply issue a warning instead of taking legal action against BreadTalk, considering that Mr Seah has described BreadTalk’s practice as “questionable” and “unacceptable” and used the words “deceive” and “mislead”. CASE has not explained the basis of its decision to the public. According to the Sale of Food Act, Chapter 283, Section 56(1), Food Regulations, Part III: 5.—(1) No person shall import, advertise, manufacture, sell, consign or deliver any prepacked food if the package of prepacked food does not bear a label containing all the particulars required by these Regulations. Penalty 261. Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of these Regulations shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $1,000 and in the case of a second or subsequent conviction to a fine not exceeding $2,000. Does BreadTalk have a case to answer under the Sale of Food Act, administered by AVA? Why did CASE not take BreadTalk to court? What do you think? Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com. |
Advert Space Available |
Bookmarks |
|
|