We can help you claim
compensation following an accident
illness or injury - nationwide
Call: 0800 10 757 95
Most product liability claims provoke feelings of, "the company should have done better" or "shame on them for their negligence", but one faulty product case that came to light in June 2009 provoked feelings of disgust, disbelief and then mindful meanderings of how on earth it might have happened.
Yes, in 2007, just before Christmas, a man from Northern Ireland opened up an innocent looking malt-loaf pack to find a whole mouse, very much dead, embedded in the bottom of the tasty treat. Pictures of the lamentable loaf quickly filled internet pages and, as in our office, many workers sat aghast at the thought of the ramifications of such a find.
What if he hadn't inspected the loaf? What if he had sliced through and gone ahead with buttering? The imagery really should stop there.
Placing the grotesque picture on to one colleague's PC desktop as a wallpaper produced much glee, especially as their vegetarian tendencies were well known in the office.
"That's one way to get protein into a vegetarian's diet," said one bright spark.
But, all joking aside, we were collectively pretty appalled at the thought and the picture soon found its way into our co-worker's virtual recycle bin.
Reading the detail of the court case was quite illuminating - the defence solicitor for the bakery produced a hygiene and maintenance schedule that appeared comprehensive, including pest control initiatives and details of 16 man-hours of daily cleaning. Yet it could not be denied that a small rodent had, somehow, ended up in a loaf tin, found itself buried under fresh dough, and had been subsequently cooked.
The court heard how, prior to the ‘mouse in the malt-loaf' incident, the loaf tins had been oiled the night before and then filled with dough the following morning - and that, since the 'product liability problem', the tins were being inverted after oiling. One presumes that as they are turned over the following morning, staff will check for any ‘nasties' that may be lurking therein.
The bakery's defence solicitor admitted it had been prohibitive to ascertain whether the mouse was alive prior to baking, and he asked the court to consider that the rodent may have been deliberately placed in the baking tin as an act of wilful sabotage. He also noted that the man who discovered the mouse was pursuing a civil action against the bakery for product liability compensation.
The district judge, in his adjudication, appeared mindful of the bakery's previous good name and reputation and imposed a fine of £1,000 plus costs - the maximum he could have exacted was £20,000.
And, as we sat in the office and deliberated the consequence of dead animals in foodstuffs we were mindful that product liability could be the bane of the bakery industry and that we should not snigger and hum old UB40 tunes about rats in kitchens.
