Have Asda Breached The Trade Description Laws?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2274170/ASDA-burgers-discovered-80-horsemeat-contamination-row-continues.html#axzz2K1sKsXYW

/// The withdrawn products are own-label 100% Beef Quarter Pounders; Beef Quarter Pounders, packs of eight beef burgers and pack of four ‘big eat’ burgers. ///

If these 100% beef quarter pounders are found to contain horse meat, could ASDA be deemed responsible?

[ChillDoubt]

If these 100% beef quarter pounders are found to contain horse meat, could ASDA be deemed responsible?
-------------------------------------
Not really. Asda act in good faith when buying their burgers and are doubtless given assurances as such. Not really their fault that the meat is contaminated/added to/tampered with at source.

[LazyGun]

Responsible for what, exactly? They could certainly be held accountable under the trades descriptions act for false advertising, I would imagine, if any of their products, described as 100% beef were found to contain horsemeat - which is why they have, as a precautionary measure, removed all such products from their shelves.

A wise, and reputationally required move, I would have though- although a move that will cost them, at least in the short term.

What all of this story suggests is that that the consumer is hostage to an extended global food chain, some elements of which may elect to resort to frankly illegal actions in order to maximise their profits, and we simply do not have sufficient checks and balances to properly protect the consumer.

It should be mandatory for DNA panel testing to be carried out on all meat destined for human consumption to establish the provenance.

[Bazile]

I kinda see where AOG is coming from .

If the product says 100 % beef then it is ultimately ASDA who is responsible , because it is their branded product and they who are offering it for sale in their stores .

Ignorance is no defence , albeit it was an ' innocent ignorance '

It's like saying that i didn't know the speed limit was 30 , when i got flashed doing 40 - or i didn't know it was a one way street i was driving in the wrong direction , along

[Bazile]

lazygun

I didn't see you there , when I was typing .
Your first para seems to agree with my post

[vakayu]

What worries me at the moment is would the average purchaser be able to distinguish between minced beef or mixed beef and horsemeat mince or mince products i.e. pies etc.Is there any distinguishing colouring or texture,I don.t think I would be able to tell the difference,never as far as I'm aware seen horsemeat?

[Mattk]

Its most commonly deascribed as horse DNA so not necessarily meat!

[shoota]

If you enact legislation requiring that ALL meat be DNA tested before human consumption the price of a burger (or anything else for that matter) would become unaffordably high.
If it tasted OK before this scandal broke it will taste just as good now.....

[youngmafbog]

Who cares, the beef in these things is hardly brilliant quality. I have no problem eating horse meat and if you have been to Europe no doubt many people have eaten it without realizing.

[LazyGun]

@ vakayu and Matt - perfectly true re the Horse DNA thing - that does not even guarantee that it was horse meat, rather than reclaimed tendon, or fat, or fibre or any other part of the horse for that matter.

And thats why I said the consumer is the hostage in all of this. There is no test or method by which the consumer can detect such adulterations - we are totally reliant on the good faith description by the retailer, and the legal obligations of the manufacturer - unless you wish to invest in a DNA sequencing machine for the home and a few months intensive tuition on how to run comparitive DNA sequencing analyses :)

Far greater controls and checks need to be established to confirm the provenance of meat products, and the costs of greater rigour need to be borne by the manufacturers and retailers, and not just passed on to the consumer....

[Bazile]

' who cares ' ?

Some people may indeed care .
If you buy a product , which says it's beef , then it's reasonable to expect that product to be as described .

You may or may not be bothered in the end , but at least you should be making an informed choice

[FredPuli43]

These are offences of strict liability, like speeding. From memory, the trader is prosecuted for selling goods not of the quality or type demanded. It's immaterial that he doesn't know, for example, that his "Cox's Orange Pippins" are ,in fact "James Grieve".

[LazyGun]

If such companies wish to market a product that may contain horsemeat, then thats fine - but the consumer should be told. I agree that actually it might not taste bad, and that it might even be regarded as a healthier meat, but thats not the point.

Retailers and manufacturers charge a premium to the consumer for offering a guarantee of "100% beef" - going on to sell product with an unknown provenance is a dubious and unethical business practice- you could even argue that it is fraudulent behaviour. Why should we be relaxed about allowing the consumer to be ripped off this way?

[Bazile]

//You may or may not be bothered in the end , but at least you should be making an informed choice //

that should read -
You may or may not be bothered in the end in eating horse meat , but at least you should be making an informed choice

[FredPuli43]

Ancient East Anglian tale:

How is it you can sell you rabbit pies so cheaply?

Well, to tell you the truth, I add a bit of horsemeat.

How much?

About fifty -fifty.

Fifty-fifty?

Yes. One horse, one rabbit.

[LazyGun]

LoL