In July of the previous year, a consumer’s dental mishap involving Waitrose meatballs has led to prolonged disputes over compensation. The customer’s husband suffered a cracked tooth from lamb meatballs purchased at Waitrose, necessitating a £160 extraction. Although Waitrose initially requested the product’s return and found bone fragments, the retailer’s response has been far from satisfactory.
Despite numerous communications and an initial written apology from Waitrose, the resolution has been elusive. In May, when the dental costs escalated due to the consideration of a £3,335 implant, a solicitor was enlisted to pursue the claim. Waitrose has now shifted responsibility, citing that the meatballs were supplied by a third party, and advised the consumer to seek redress from the manufacturer.
Consumer rights advocate SB from Bridgwater, Somerset, criticized Waitrose’s approach, arguing that the retailer’s initial indication of reimbursement was misleading. The delay and subsequent redirection seem to have been prompted by the higher cost of dental treatment. The solicitor’s recent communication suggests that Waitrose is absolved of fault due to the inability to inspect sealed products before sale, a point which conflicts with the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which mandates retailers to provide compensation for faulty products.
Gary Rycroft, a consumer law expert from Joseph A Jones solicitors, stated that Waitrose should have initially handled the reimbursement and sought recovery from the manufacturer later. Rycroft expressed concern over Waitrose’s apparent attempt to evade its responsibilities, calling it “disingenuous.”
Following further scrutiny, Waitrose agreed to settle with £4,000. The company revealed that claims exceeding a certain amount are typically referred to its insurer, implying that consumers are left to manage the complexities of the claims process.
You Might Be Interested In
