Refund on rotton can of beans less than the postage costs.

Run_to_da_hills

My old man opened a well known brand of beans a few months ago and found them rotten to the core inside, i.e. they were mouldy and black. My guess was that the can was not sealed correctly. Anyway he followed it up and forwarded the can to the address of the manufacturers in the UK. Expecting to get a nice bonus voucher for his troubles he got a UK postal order to the value of 4 quid which was less than the price he paid for the postage and the can of beans. He was furious and intends to follow it up. In future if I ever get a rotten can of any thing from this company I will go straight to the tabloids with it.

Doctor DooM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

My old man opened a well known brand of beans a few months ago and found them rotten to the core inside, i.e. they were mouldy and black. My guess was that the can was not sealed correctly. Anyway he followed it up and forwarded the can to the address of the manufacturers in the UK. Expecting to get a nice bonus voucher for his troubles he got a UK postal order to the value of 4 quid which was less than the price he paid for the postage and the can of beans. He was furious and intends to follow it up. In future if I ever get a rotten can of any thing from this company I will go straight to the tabloids with it.

Calm down. I am sure when the company realises that they'll send something more out.

Remember things are cheaper in the UK and they prob didn't what they gave you is pretty insulting (There are part of England where 3 pints can still be bought for 5 pounds.)

Actually, does anyone know the legality of this? Is the company responsible for the goods not fit for purpose supposed to pay the p and p?

c - 13

If i'm not mistaken the company doesn't have to offer anything.

They can just send a simple note to say thanks for bringing it to their attention and they will investigate it. (If they even bother with that)

Most companies however will offer some form of compensation as its considered good customer relations. In fairness they probably neglected to factor the cost of the postage into the postal order they sent you.

They also returned more than the cost of the original product.

Cabaal

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

In future if I ever get a rotten can of any thing from this company I will go straight to the tabloids with it.

Yes and I'm sure that The Sun will run it as front page news! :rolleyes:

May I suggest that you actually send a letter outlining that your unhappy with how the company is treating its loyal customers, but remember they don't have to give you lots of free stuff.

wyndham

The company doesn't have to offer anything.
He didn't eat any of the beans and could have just brought them back to the shop for exchange in the first instance.
No personal injury has occurred. May not be the company's fault. Could be an issue with transport/storage in the shop, etc,etc.

Tabloids? Only faeces, flesh-eating bacteria, rodents, animal parts, fingers,ears, glass-eyes, condoms, tampons and, de temps-en-temps, glass shards, are of interest when found in food. Nobody is interested in a gone-off can of beans, for some strange reason.

Tell your old man to get over it, that lifetime supply of the 57 varieties won't be coming his way any time soon.;)

ejmaztec

Next time, send half the contents of the tin and a photocopy of a very large hospital bill.

Cabaal

ejmaztec wrote: »

Next time, send half the contents of the tin and a photocopy of a very large hospital bill.

there still not liable, it would be clear the person had eaten gone off beans...what kind of ejit does that?

ejmaztec

Cabaal wrote: »

there still not liable, it would be clear the person had eaten gone off beans...what kind of ejit does that?

Someone with no sense of smell, bad eyesight or a passion for Russian Roulette.

Oh, and by the way. The other half of the contents have been thrown away, not eaten - should have made that clear.

axer

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

My old man opened a well known brand of beans a few months ago and found them rotten to the core inside, i.e. they were mouldy and black.

Why didn't he bring them back to where he bought them and get a refund?

craichoe

Compo culture ... yayyyy !!!

FFS :mad:

Murt10

His contract was with the shop that he bought the beans off, not the manufacturer.

Also, I think he should have reported it to the Environmental Health Section of the HSE.

EKRIUQ

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

In future if I ever get a rotten can of any thing from this company I will go straight to the tabloids with it.

No wonder Ireland has the highest rate for litigation(suing people) with attitudes like that. Build a bridge and get over it!!.

From the offset when you didn't bring it back to the shop you were looking for compensation, why don't you include ringing Joe Duffy in your threats:rolleyes:

axer

Murt10 wrote: »

His contract was with the shop that he bought the beans off, not the manufacturer.

The OP has the right to go back to the manufacturer as more than likely the receipt was well thrown away.

OP: Did the manufacturer tell your aul lad to send the can to them or was that his own "initiative"?

Murt10 wrote: »

Also, I think he should have reported it to the Environmental Health Section of the HSE.

Because of one mouldy can?

the_syco

axer wrote: »

The OP has the right to go back to the manufacturer as more than likely the receipt was well thrown away.

Without the reciept / proof-of-purchase, the can could have been bought 4 months ago.

Blisterman

How much did the beans cost in the first place? Maybe 50c?

No offence, but I think your dad has way too much time on his hands if he's going to go to all the trouble of packaging it, queing up at the post office, and sending it, for the sake of 50c.

Just out of interest, did either of you contact the manufacturer, letting them know you were unhappy with your refund, before coming on here, and posting this?

chuckles30

Next time you have a problem with a product, just send a letter including the label and any batch codes/expiry dates etc printed on the product. They don't actually need the product itself back. I've done this a couple of times and have gotten vouchers back for about €5 off whatever product is involved. Even if you don't get anything back, you're only at the loss of the price of a stamp. Also, you should always look for the Irish complaints address, therefore you're vouchers will be in € as UK ones are probably not valid here.

axer

the_syco wrote: »

Without the reciept / proof-of-purchase, the can could have been bought 4 months ago.

That wouldnt matter as it is the date on the tin can that matters i.e. it seems it went off before its best by date.

Doctor DooM

axer wrote: »

That wouldnt matter as it is the date on the tin can that matters i.e. it seems it went off before its best by date.

But that would be the retailers fault, not the manufacturers.

axer

SDooM wrote: »

But that would be the retailers fault, not the manufacturers.

Either or. The contents of the can did not last as long as they should have - the can must not have been sealed properly. I do not dispute that the OP could bring the can back to the shop where it was bought but it might be hard to prove it was bought there. I doubt the OP has proof of purchase anymore so it might be wiser to go back to the manufacturer where proof of purchase is not needed. If the OP has proof of purchase then it would definitely make more sense to go back to the shop.

Run_to_da_hills

The date of consumption was well into the end of this year. Before dates of consumption were ever introduced as a cumpulsory measure, canned food has been known to last many years.

Canis Lupus

Your da got the value back, it's his problem if he posted them off to the UK. The only reason he did this was ye were expecting a lorry load of beans to be shipped back.

I would have probably lolled if I saw his face when he opened the letter back from them. They're a company, not a charity for chancers.

Run_to_da_hills

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Your da got the value back, it's his problem if he posted them off to the UK. The only reason he did this was ye were expecting a lorry load of beans to be shipped back.

I would have probably lolled if I saw his face when he opened the letter back from them. They're a company, not a charity for chancers.

He deserves something from them, if you were an 86 year old pensioner and opened a can of beans and poured them into a plate and then discovered that they stank and were moldy wouldn’t you expect some sort of a gesture for bringing the matter discreetly to attention of them rather than making it public.

He was not looking for a truck load of beans, that would kill him altogether (Or the rest of the household ) All they had to give him was a token voucher cover his costs and show their appreciation for reporting the matter, it would have been no skin off their back and would do some small bit towards their PR. What’s the sense of having a customer satisfaction address on a product label if they are not going to bother following it up. It is this type of carry on that leads people to getting on to the tabloid press before contacting the manufacturers.

axer

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

He deserves something from them, if you were an 86 year old pensioner and opened a can of beans and poured them into a plate and then discovered that they stank and were moldy wouldn’t you expect some sort of a gesture for bringing the matter discreetly to attention of them rather than making it public.

He was not looking for a truck load of beans, that would kill him altogether (Or the rest of the household ) All they had to give him was a token voucher cover his costs and show their appreciation for reporting the matter, it would have been no skin off their back and would do some small bit towards their PR. What’s the sense of having a customer satisfaction address on a product label if they are not going to bother following it up. It is this type of carry on that leads people to getting on to the tabloid press before contacting the manufacturers.

Firstly, why would someone go to tabloids over a can of tinned beans? Its hardly a conspiracy.
Secondly, I thought the company did follow this up and gave a 4 pound postal order?
Thirdly, why in earth would someone send a can of baked beans back to the manufacturer unless requested to do so? I think somehow it would have cost a lot less than 4 pounds to send a letter of complaint (and possibly a photo).
So how much exactly did he want from the company?

board om

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

He deserves something from them, if you were an 86 year old pensioner and opened a can of beans and poured them into a plate and then discovered that they stank and were moldy wouldn’t you expect some sort of a gesture for bringing the matter discreetly to attention of them rather than making it public.

He was not looking for a truck load of beans, that would kill him altogether (Or the rest of the household ) All they had to give him was a token voucher cover his costs and show their appreciation for reporting the matter, it would have been no skin off their back and would do some small bit towards their PR. What’s the sense of having a customer satisfaction address on a product label if they are not going to bother following it up. It is this type of carry on that leads people to getting on to the tabloid press before contacting the manufacturers.

tabloids? PR? dear jebus, its A gone off tin of beans. you would swear he had discovered evidence that Heinz were making their beans out of baby seals and using a children's sweat shop to package them.

future reference if you buy something in the supermarket and it is gone off, you bring it back to the supermarket and get a refund. these companies arent stupid and they have people looking for freebies all the time. they made quite a generous gesture under the circumstances becuase really they didnt have to offer anything. now if he had opened the tin and found a finger in it then fair enough, but it is a 50c tin of beans and he got £4 sterling for it. i would consider that a good deal. the problem here is that the kind gesture of what you got has been over shadowed by the greed of what you 'expected' to get.

Cabaal

tabloids lol, can we move this to the humor board maybe?

Canis Lupus

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

He deserves something from them, if you were an 86 year old pensioner and opened a can of beans and poured them into a plate and then discovered that they stank and were moldy wouldn’t you expect some sort of a gesture for bringing the matter discreetly to attention of them rather than making it public.

He was not looking for a truck load of beans, that would kill him altogether (Or the rest of the household ) All they had to give him was a token voucher cover his costs and show their appreciation for reporting the matter, it would have been no skin off their back and would do some small bit towards their PR. What’s the sense of having a customer satisfaction address on a product label if they are not going to bother following it up. It is this type of carry on that leads people to getting on to the tabloid press before contacting the manufacturers.

It....was......a.....can......of.....beans.......

Not dolls that give children lead poisoning.

Any 'normal' old age pensioner that I know would have gone back to the shop (or may have just thrown it in the bin and forgotten about it), pointed out the mouldy beans and would have been apologised to and been given a new can in return. End of story.

Whilst I understand what you're aiming at, in this case you didn't get your gesture of goodwill (personally I don't see the need for said gesture anyway over one can of mouldy beans from obviously a faulty can). Move on. Buy Branstons or something in future.

Doctor DooM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

He deserves something from them, if you were an 86 year old pensioner and opened a can of beans and poured them into a plate and then discovered that they stank and were moldy wouldn’t you expect some sort of a gesture for bringing the matter discreetly to attention of them rather than making it public.

He was not looking for a truck load of beans, that would kill him altogether (Or the rest of the household ) All they had to give him was a token voucher cover his costs and show their appreciation for reporting the matter, it would have been no skin off their back and would do some small bit towards their PR. What’s the sense of having a customer satisfaction address on a product label if they are not going to bother following it up. It is this type of carry on that leads people to getting on to the tabloid press before contacting the manufacturers.

Ok, RTDH, you have to understand that to the people who post in this forum, this thread is a bit like one saying "I kan prove god doesn't exist" in the Christian forum. It happens all the time, and while there may be merit in the argument it gets lost in the application. Alot of people who post here have worked in the service industry or retail, and it gets a little old hearing people going on about their terrible treatment when it's really the smallest thing in the world. People here are giving up their free time to offer free advice on something they have spent years working at, in general. This, however, doesn't mean you are wrong in what you are saying.

The things to take from it on your side would be this:

1) The retailer, not the manufacturer, is responsible for repair, replacement, or refund.

2) The compensation in this case legally doesn't have to be any more than the original worth you paid for the item.

3) As I pointed out before, the English company probably didn't realise how little £4 converts to in Ireland. Why don't you contact them and explain that to them?

For everyone else here, do you not think it's getting a bit cliquey in here? I do and I have to admit I'm guilty of it. Time to be a bit more friendly I think.

Run_to_da_hills

Canis Lupus wrote: »

It....was......a.....can......of.....beans.......

Not dolls that give children lead poisoning.

Any 'normal' old age pensioner that I know would have gone back to the shop (or may have just thrown it in the bin and forgotten about it), pointed out the mouldy beans and would have been apologised to and been given a new can in return. End of story.

Whilst I understand what you're aiming at, in this case you didn't get your gesture of goodwill (personally I don't see the need for said gesture anyway over one can of mouldy beans from obviously a faulty can). Move on. Buy Branstons or something in future.

Any normal old age pensioner would probably be dead from food poisoning from eating the rotten can of beans and would not have made it as far as the hall door never mind down to the super market where he bought them. Forget photographing any defective product, anyone with a good digital camera and a copy of Photoshop can do wonders.

axer

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Forget photographing any defective product, anyone with a good digital camera and a copy of Photoshop can do wonders.

And they wouldnt even bother questioning because it would cost them more to refund postage if requiring the goods to be sent back. Who is to say that your father didnt open the can as soon as he bought it and left it there to go bad? They are taking his word either way.

Your father should have been given the price of the tin of beans (€1 max) plus as a good will gesture the cost of posting a letter of complaint (€1 max) and maybe a voucher for 2 tins of beans. He actually got more than that - he should be happy.

It is not their fault if someone is silly enough to post the actual tin of beans back without first contacting the company by phone or letter first. There is no law that entitles the purchaser to more than the cost of the tin of beans unless someone was actually injuried by the product.

Run_to_da_hills

axer wrote: »

There is no law that entitles the purchaser to more than the cost of the tin of beans unless someone was actually injuried by the product.

He could have died from food poisoning, I didn't see the offending can but I am sure I would have thrown my guts up with just the whiff of them. The reason he would have sent them back was to give the manufacturers a taste of their own medicine and that they should examine their quality control.

Someone brings a can of rotten Heinz beans back to Tesco, it is immediately dumped in the skip down the back, a replacement can is offered to the customer, and a request is made by Tesco to the manufacturer for a freebee/credit to replace the offending can. More than likely the manufacturer will never see the offending can and how it managed to escape QC and see if this could be a potential problem in the future, ie were the cans sealed right, was there bacteria in the food before it was packed, was there more in the same batch etc.

Doctor DooM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

He could have died from food poisoning, I didn't see the offending can but I am sure I would have thrown my guts up with just the whiff of them. The reason he would have sent them back was to give the manufacturers a taste of their own medicine and that they should examine their quality control.

Are you ignoring my earler post? that took some time to type.

So say if the can got damaged in the stock room of the store and air got in it, causing the food to age. How would that be the manufacturers fault?

See my point?