Found a huge splinter of wood in my butter? Who do I complain to

GlynD

liam8282 wrote: »

I thought it was about seeking redress, not attempting to benefit from the company's mistake.

Define "redress".

liam8282

GlynD wrote: »

Define "redress".

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=redress&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&client=firefox-a&rlz=1R1GGGL_en-GB___GB359#hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=bSm&rlz=1R1GGGL_en-GB___GB359&q=redress&tbs=dfn:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=rT_mTZTXH4KAhQeX6dmxCg&ved=0CCoQkQ4&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=e1b35784d87084b0&biw=1024&bih=575

re·dressverb /riˈdres/  /ˈrēˌdres/  
redressed, past participle; redressed, past tense; redresses, 3rd person singular present; redressing, present participle

1. Remedy or set right (an undesirable or unfair situation)
   • - the power to redress the grievances of our citizens
2. Set upright again
   • - some ambitious architect being called to redress a leaning wall
   
   
   

noun /riˈdres/  /ˈrēˌdres/  
redresses, plural
Remedy or compensation for a wrong or grievance

• - those seeking redress for an infringement of public law rights

So in this instance, the OP found a piece of wood in the butter.

No actual harm was done.

The OP has lost out on a pack of butter at most.

The OP should not benefit from the company, but an apology, an explanation and the value of the butter, plus maybe some vouchers as a gesture of goodwill, is more than sufficient in my opinion.

GlynD

liam8282 wrote: »

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=redress&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&client=firefox-a&rlz=1R1GGGL_en-GB___GB359#hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=bSm&rlz=1R1GGGL_en-GB___GB359&q=redress&tbs=dfn:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=rT_mTZTXH4KAhQeX6dmxCg&ved=0CCoQkQ4&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=e1b35784d87084b0&biw=1024&bih=575

re·dressverb /riˈdres/  /ˈrēˌdres/  
redressed, past participle; redressed, past tense; redresses, 3rd person singular present; redressing, present participle

1. Remedy or set right (an undesirable or unfair situation)
   • - the power to redress the grievances of our citizens
2. Set upright again
   • - some ambitious architect being called to redress a leaning wall

noun /riˈdres/  /ˈrēˌdres/  
redresses, plural


Remedy or compensation for a wrong or grievance

• - those seeking redress for an infringement of public law rights

So in this instance, the OP found a piece of wood in the butter.

No actual harm was done.

The OP has lost out on a pack of butter at most.

The OP should not benefit from the company, but an apology, an explanation and the value of the butter, plus maybe some vouchers as a gesture of goodwill, is more than sufficient in my opinion.

Note the highlighted text "Remedy or compensation for a wrong or grievance."

I respect your opinion but there are others, like me, who believe that redress should mean compensation for the shock and distress caused by finding foreign bodies in what should be a perfectly safe product.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the matter of opinion - fair enough?

liam8282

GlynD wrote: »

Note the highlighted text "Remedy or compensation for a wrong or grievance."

The wrong = 1 packet of butter had a bit of wood in it.

Compensation = the cost of 1 packet of butter.

GlynD wrote: »

I respect your opinion but there are others, like me, who believe that redress should mean compensation for the shock and distress caused by finding foreign bodies in what should be a perfectly safe product.

Yes I can see your point.

But I also believe that some people can be very dramatic in situations like these and blow things out of all proportion, purely for monetary gain.

I mean the shock and distress of finding a bit of wood in some butter, the horror of it.

The compensation should fit the crime, so to speak. As no actual harm was done, I really don't think the OP should expect anything from the company, (other than what I have already said).

On the other hand, if they had not spotted the wood and cut their mouth open or broken a tooth, that would be a different matter.

GlynD wrote: »

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the matter of opinion - fair enough?

Ok.

GlynD

liam8282 wrote: »

The wrong = 1 packet of butter had a bit of wood in it.

Compensation = the cost of 1 packet of butter.



Yes I can see your point.

But I also believe that some people can be very dramatic in situations like these and blow things out of all proportion, purely for monetary gain.

I mean the shock and distress of finding a bit of wood in some butter, the horror of it.

The compensation should fit the crime, so to speak. As no actual harm was done, I really don't think the OP should expect anything from the company, (other than what I have already said).

On the other hand, if they had not spotted the wood and cut their mouth open or broken a tooth, that would be a different matter.



Ok.

This is purely subjective but in my opinion the manufacturer, let's call them "Smith's Butter" will see the damage caused by this failure as a loss of trade from our OP and all his/her friends. They'll all buy "Jones Butter" instead. Ergo, it stands to reason that the board of Smith's Butter will find it cheaper to give our OP £1,000 or a year's free supply of salted butter than to lose all the trade of our OP and pals.

Do you see what I'm driving at?

In my case it was milk. In exchange for not going to EH with a bottle which contained car body filler, I received a large hamper of goodies.

liam8282

GlynD wrote: »

This is purely subjective but in my opinion the manufacturer, let's call them "Smith's Butter" will see the damage caused by this failure as a loss of trade from our OP and all his/her friends. They'll all buy "Jones Butter" instead. Ergo, it stands to reason that the board of Smith's Butter will find it cheaper to give our OP £1,000 or a year's free supply of salted butter than to lose all the trade of our OP and pals.

Do you see what I'm driving at?

Yes I do, basically blackmailing a company into giving you something you are not entitled to.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying not to complain and be compensated accordingly.

What I am saying is don't try and exaggerate the situation to try and extort the company.

GlynD wrote: »

In my case it was milk. In exchange for not going to EH with a bottle which contained car body filler, I received a large hamper of goodies.

How did you know the bottle contained car body filler?! That seems very random?

Anyway, a hamper of goodies is merely a gesture of goodwill on the milk companies behalf.

I did say earlier that a gesture of goodwill would be more than sufficient.

In your particular case, it seems you received a more than generous goodwill gesture, others are most likely to get a simple apology, their money back and maybe some vouchers if they are lucky.

At the end of the day, no damage has actually been done, so no matter how hard you push it, if it ever went to court no damages or compensation would be awarded, because quite simply no damage has been caused.

GlynD

Yes I do, basically blackmailing a company into giving you something you are not entitled to.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying not to complain and be compensated accordingly.

What I am saying is don't try and exaggerate the situation to try and extort the company.

Not extort. Make the best of the situation. Know your rights.

How did you know the bottle contained car body filler?! That seems very random?

Because I know what car body filler looks like.

Anyway, a hamper of goodies is merely a gesture of goodwill on the milk companies behalf.

I did say earlier that a gesture of goodwill would be more than sufficient.

And I merely said that the better the redress the more likely the consumer would be to show loyalty to the brand.

In your particular case, it seems you received a more than generous goodwill gesture, others are most likely to get a simple apology, their money back and maybe some vouchers if they are lucky.

I could have done that company a lot of harm. They persuaded me otherwise by giving me material benefit.

At the end of the day, no damage has actually been done, so no matter how hard you push it, if it ever went to court no damages or compensation would be awarded, because quite simply no damage has been caused.

It's not the consumer who takes them to court old bean, it's EH. They can only do that if you provide the evidence. I've simply been pointing out that there are advantages to letting the company know you're prepared to withold it in exchange for "redress".

It's as I said earlier, you and I are from opposing sides of the fence. I'm not going to persuade you or try to convert you to my way of thinking and you aren't going to convince me that I'm wrong. Interested observers will be similarly split. I vote we leave it at that because all we're doing now is rehashing the same argument over and over again. What say you?

hansi

vyle wrote: »

I guess you can't believe it's not butter?

And I guess, if ther quality control was better, you wodden't have found it!

NiallB

GlynD wrote: »

I could have done that company a lot of harm. They persuaded me otherwise by giving me material benefit.

Lets try that in Imogen Thomas's voice:

"I could have done Ryan Giggs a lot of harm. He could have persuaded me otherwise by giving me material benefit."

Nope, still sounds like blackmail to me.

Fenris

GlynD wrote: »

I could have done that company a lot of harm. They persuaded me otherwise by giving me material benefit.

I think those two sentances go a long way to proving the point I made above; compensation culture has infected the Great British public and has turned some of us into the type of people who would be willing go to great lenghts for little gain. Honestly, you must have really, really wanted that hamper of stuff you'll never eat! (Seriously, has anyone ever had a hamper with food in it that they'd actually consume? It's all tinned ham, English Breakfast tea that tastes like it's been stewed for a week and a packet of something you're not entirely sure what to do with!)

I honestly wouldn't have the time/energy/inclination to blackmai... excuse me, "persuade" a company to give me stuff for the sake of a forereign body that may or may not have entered the product in their factory. (There are a lot of crazy people who like to contaminate food after it's left the factory.) It's just not worth it to me. If you'd told me you got a grand or something in compensation then maybe I could see your point. But all that hassle for a few tins of food? Probably only cost them penny's to put together (as I expect it was all their own branded stuff) anyway. You'd have been better off with five or ten Pounds worth of vouchers!

Sorry, I just genuinely don't see the point of putting in all that effort for the same outcome as just sending the company a polite e-mail.

But as you say, it's all subjective. I can't stand Marmite but some crazy fools love it!