Approved food general discussion part deux

Wolfsbayne

Ive had my order from the 20th delivered. Everything well packed and fine, the new courier seems fine too (I wasnt there but there didn't seem to be any problems).

The only thing I noticed was that the mini tarts had a 'use by date of 28/02/09' rather than best before so i'd better get them eaten sharpish.

laurenjade1402

My order from the 21st has just arrived. All items ordered are present. Packed on the 28th so 7 days delay as stated on the website, obviously bit of a delay in delivering due to the weekend.
Very well packaged and box fine.
Delivered by DHL, I did receiving a tracking number as well.
This is my 4th order and once again I am extremely happy with the whole process.

wookie_2

Just had my umteenth order delevered,which i placed on the 22nd feb, using the heavy weight postage, loads of fruit juice and tiptop, all well packaged and very happy. Did not recieve a dispatch e-mail but thats not a prob at the mo. Roll on my next one with all those cakes in yum:p

jaytin

Wolfsbayne wrote: »

The only thing I noticed was that the mini tarts had a 'use by date of 28/02/09' rather than best before so i'd better get them eaten sharpish.

I didn't think that AF supplied foods with a 'use-by' or 'sell-by' date, only ones with a 'best before' date as they are not likely to 'go off' and are not under the same regulations. I took the following from their own website:

'Remember, some of the goods sold on this site might be past their “best before” date but are never past their “use by” dates.
Selling products that have passed their “use by” date carries serious health risks. However “best before” date relates more to the optimum quality of the product. '

Are you sure it has a 'use-by' date Wolfsbayne?

aytch

My order for 21st arrived, well packed ... and VERY heavy!

Wolfsbayne

jaytin wrote: »

I didn't think that AF supplied foods with a 'use-by' or 'sell-by' date, only ones with a 'best before' date as they are not likely to 'go off' and are not under the same regulations. I took the following from their own website:

'Remember, some of the goods sold on this site might be past their “best before” date but are never past their “use by” dates.
Selling products that have passed their “use by” date carries serious health risks. However “best before” date relates more to the optimum quality of the product. '

Are you sure it has a 'use-by' date Wolfsbayne?

I was surprised too, I know how AF work but it is definitely a use by. I could post a photo if you want. It says:

'190G.e. USE BY 28TH FEBRUARY 2009 BATCH 2619'

jaytin

Sorry Wolfsbayne it wasn't that I didn't believe you, I didn't mean to imply that you were not telling the truth, it's just that I am a little astonished that you were sent them is all. By their own admission on their own website it says that eating products over the use-by date can make people ill. I hope this was just a mistake.
Maybe they thought you would receive them before the 'use-by' date?! :eek:

Wolfsbayne

jaytin wrote: »

Sorry Wolfsbayne it wasn't that I didn't believe you, I didn't mean to imply that you were not telling the truth, it's just that I am a little astonished that you were sent them is all. By their own admission on their own website it says that eating products over the use-by date can make people ill. I hope this was just a mistake.
Maybe they thought you would receive them before the 'use-by' date?! :eek:

It's ok, like I said I was astonished too. I did order on the 20th so they could have thought I would get them in time but they were still on the site a few days after that so I don't know. I don't know whether I should eat them or not either too be honest. They look fine but it is 3 days after the use by and it must be a use by for a reason.

jaytin

I think that is a decision you will have to make for yourself, personally I think I might be inclined to just ask for a refund on them. I am assuming this was simply an oversight and AF did not notice they had a 'use-by' and not a 'best-before'. I don't know what they are made of but if they have anything 'dairy' in them it might be dangerous to eat them.

ams13

poet123 wrote: »

I quite agree Jaytin.

The purpose of a forum is to show both sides of a situation. There is no point someone saying my experience is xxx so therefore your points are invalid,or telling people not to bother ordering if they encounter problems.

I am sure AF would far rather hear the issues than simply lose custom.

I also have to agree that certain posters defend AF to the hilt,and seem to actively want to denigrate the issues others have, or alternatively post comment which is off topic and belongs on the food discussion about this company. The intent behind those comments seems to be deflection. It is also pertinent to note that previous posts were removed for this very reason whilst many more are now left in place.

This was the issue on the last thread and it is now creeping in here again. All posters,new or longstanding have an equal right to put their views across,and expect to be shown no bias or favour in the way they are moderated. Equally, those who post responses must expect to be answered in the tone of their posts, and not cry foul when this happens.;)


I have a current order outstanding and it is beyond the date that AF stated they were up to,so technically late,my last order was badly packed and the contents useless,and the courier was also an issue. Therefore by any definition:rolleyes: I am entitled to pass comment, and will do so,regardless of anyone elses view on the situation or how vigorously they defend the company.

I have no issues with how my complaints were dealt with re the packaging/refund. I received excellent customer service in that respect.

That does not negate the other issues,nor prevent me from commenting,nor will it.

I completely agree with this statement thanks for posting it saved me typing