Stone found in chocolates - what rights?

p00hsticks

Endymion wrote: »

the least I'd expect is some free stuff, not least as hush money for not tweeting how dangerous their supposedly luxury chocs are.

In your original post you stated that you have already tweeted about it, so that boat has presumably sailed....


and if you really think that the chocolates are 'dangerous', why on earth would you want more, free or not ?

Endymion

Fair question, p00sticks. Fact it I have long trusted this brand and they make gluten- and dairy-free chocolates. My wife has coeliac disease so options are actually very limited. If it were easier to find something good for her then I'd more easily move on to another brand.

iclayt

A simple email:

"Hello. I returned some chocolates to you because we found a small piece of stone in one of them. I understand that you have received them and hopefully you are looking into how this happened. My wife and I have enjoyed your chocolates for some time, therefore I would like to request a refund or replacement for these chocolates so that we may continue to do so in future."

If you enjoy this brand and have never had any problems with them in the past, why would you want to make things difficult for them by "tweeting how dangerous their supposedly luxury chocs are" - ok, it isn't nice to find something in your food that you don't expect to be there, but nothing happened, I think you're being a bit overdramatic!

Endymion

Thanks, everyone. I am grateful for the reality check. I'll let you know what happens.

Queenriderbrekke

Also consider the possibility that it is not a piece of stone but a small piece of cherry pip or nut shell?

Endymion

Queenriderbrekke wrote: »

Also consider the possibility that it is not a piece of stone but a small piece of cherry pip or nut shell?

Nope, it's clearly flint - about the size of a pea.

Bantex_2

Chocolate rots your teeth anyway. Best to just not eat the stuff.

unholyangel

Bantex wrote: »

Chocolate rots your teeth anyway. Best to just not eat the stuff.

Well it does if you dont brush them. But apparently chocolate is better for your teeth than crisps or raisins (again, taking brushing out of the equation).

Toothsmith

unholyangel wrote: »

Well it does if you dont brush them. But apparently chocolate is better for your teeth than crisps or raisins (again, taking brushing out of the equation).

Brushing isn't really in the 'rotting' equation anyway.

If you eat (even very small amounts of) sugar frequently, then your teeth will rot, nomatter how much you brush them.

So if you're a snacker and a sweet/sugary/acidic/ drink sipper, then your teeth will rot in no time. If you're a 3 square meals a day eater, with only (unsweetened) tea/coffee/ milk or water in between meals - your teeth will not rot - even if you don't brush them!

(Of course, if you don't brush them, they will all fall out from gum disease!)

unholyangel

Toothsmith wrote: »

Brushing isn't really in the 'rotting' equation anyway.

If you eat (even very small amounts of) sugar frequently, then your teeth will rot, nomatter how much you brush them.

So if you're a snacker and a sweet/sugary/acidic/ drink sipper, then your teeth will rot in no time. If you're a 3 square meals a day eater, with only (unsweetened) tea/coffee/ milk or water in between meals - your teeth will not rot - even if you don't brush them!

(Of course, if you don't brush them, they will all fall out from gum disease!)

I was going off the studies done that found that chocolate is rinsed off more (with saliva) than crisps or raisins and because of them not being rinsed away, the acidic levels reach much higher (as apparently its not the sugar that rots your teeth but the acid it produces) so is much worse for those who dont brush/brush regularly.