Maggots in Qantas Trail Mix

[Reggie]

As reported on ninemsn;

Qantas apologises for maggots in trail mix

Qantas has apologised after a mother travelling on a flight from LA to Melbourne was given a pack of trail mix infested with maggots.
Victoria Cleven, 42, said she was given two packets of the trail mix as a snack during the flight last week, the Herald Sun reports.
She opened one of the packets in the darkened plane and began eating the nuts and dried fruits without turning her overhead light on.
"It tasted strange, and I turned the light on and looked at the rest of the packet, and just started seeing maggots coming out of it everywhere," she said.
"I couldn't talk. I was nearly throwing up. I was beside myself."
Her 15-year-old son checked two other packets of the Australian-made trail mix and found they also contained maggots.
A Qantas spokesman said the airline had contacted the supplier and is currently investigating how the issue occurred.
"Qantas sincerely apologises to Mrs Cleven for the incident that occurred on her return flight from LAX to Melbourne,” the spokesman said.
Ms Cleven, who paid $1600 for her ticket, said she was offered $400 as compensation by the airline

 

[netgrom]

$400 as compensation? On one hand that seems low but at the end of the day if your at a restaurant and it happened you would just get a free meal not the taxi home, its more the suppliers fault no mention of the brand.

 

[Nigelinoz]

Not a nice experience for the lady but to be honest I'm not putting too much blame on Qantas,when you serve per packed snacks like this there will be times when despite the best quality control things go wrong.
As I said not a nice thing but I am sure that QF will look after the lady.
The story is on page two of the Herald Sun-which in my opinion is about 10 pages better than it deserves.
Cheers
N'oz

 

[TonyHancock]

There is no doubt this was an unpleasant experience but why go to the newspapers with it. $400 is not an inconsiderable sum and the woman in question does not appear to have been maimed or severely injured. I sometimes wonder just where we are heading as a society.

 

[Sprucegoose]

Come on you lawyers out there. Wasn't that the Stevenson case?

 

[nlagalle]

Shouldn't the manufacturer be at fault though? Sealed pack etc..

 

[medhead]

Makes the case for gamma radiation sterilisation pretty well.


Sent from the Throne

 

[oz_mark]

Come on you lawyers out there. Wasn't that the Stevenson case?

a.k.a. the snail in the bottle case!

 

[AVC]

Shouldn't the manufacturer be at fault though? Sealed pack etc..

The manufacturer didn't take money off the passenger for a plane ticket. The PAX in question is Qantas' customer, therefore it's up to Qantas to smooth it out.
If Qantas then want to attack the manufacturer (as they should) then it's up to them.

When we had our shop, if someone bought a faulty item, we didn't say "go see xx_xx for a refund". We would refund or whatever. If we shipped a faulty item, we would pay return shipping, as well refunding or replacing the item and re-sending it for free. That's called customer service.

IMO Qantas should have given her a freebie flight, and sent her a big letter of apology, which basically puts the blame on the manufacturer. Win win. For Qantas $400 IS an inconsiderate sum, when it comes to bad press, and very possibly a lawsuit.

 

[UP4014]

Give her a free flight, then deduct that fare from the next payment to the supplier. If the supplier complains I'd tell them I'll see them in court if they'd prefer. Maybe not the correct process but certainly helps focus the supplier.

Matt

 

[nlagalle]

The manufacturer didn't take money off the passenger for a plane ticket. The PAX in question is Qantas' customer, therefore it's up to Qantas to smooth it out.
If Qantas then want to attack the manufacturer (as they should) then it's up to them.

When we had our shop, if someone bought a faulty item, we didn't say "go see xx_xx for a refund". We would refund or whatever. If we shipped a faulty item, we would pay return shipping, as well refunding or replacing the item and re-sending it for free. That's called customer service.

IMO Qantas should have given her a freebie flight, and sent her a big letter of apology, which basically puts the blame on the manufacturer. Win win. For Qantas $400 IS an inconsiderate sum, when it comes to bad press, and very possibly a lawsuit.

Changing of money has nothing to do with it. My point still stands, why should it be a Qantas bash when they didn't package the food? Sure you can complain to QF about it and let them handle it (or report it to the food Authority as well), but really is it QF's fault? that's how the article is written.

Mind you i have had plenty of times where I've been referred to the manufacturer for a return - the store won't have anything to do with it past 30 days or sometimes less.

 

[amaroo]

Makes the case for gamma radiation sterilisation pretty well.


Sent from the Throne

Unless you're a cat

 

[zan5hin]

Wow, if that happened to me and all they offered was $400, I would be beside myself. At the very minimum, as stated by another poster, a full refund and a big letter of apology.

She will probably be bringing her own packed lunch for her next Qantas flight after that experience.......

Although I must say, compared to the food I was served in Y on MEL-LAX-MEL a few years ago, maggots might be an improvement.

 

[samh004]

There is no doubt this was an unpleasant experience but why go to the newspapers with it. $400 is not an inconsiderable sum and the woman in question does not appear to have been maimed or severely injured. I sometimes wonder just where we are heading as a society.

Can you please stop wondering until I get my compensation payout too

Agree with the majority though, it is the manufacturers issue, but as Qantas sold the ticket they have to provide the compo and perhaps later take that figure back to the manufacturer.

 

[medhead]

Except you only end up with sterile live pests. A kill dose is much higher and bodies such as FSANZ (Food Standards Australia New Zealand) have only approved irradiation of produce for human consumption up to 1000kGy (from memory) which will sterilise but not necessarily kill.

I'm not talking about making the insects unable to reproduce, I'm talking about sterilising the food by using radiation to kill the insects. This is what they do with bandaids and other medical supplies.

I think it's probably safe to assume that the maggots weren't sealed up into the package live. Which suggests they developed in the package from eggs. So a little bit of irradiation kills, or delays, development of the eggs into maggots.

The FDA tells me that 1kGy will eliminate insects in grains, fruits and nuts. They call this low dose irradiation. High dose irradiation is listed as 10 to 45+ kGy and that produces shelf-stable packages meats and specialised hospital meals. I dare say 1000 kGy will be more that enough but it sounds rather high, are you sure it's correct as an upper limit for food irradiation?


Sent from the Throne

 

[Mh4k]

I'd expect and demand at a minimum a full refund of the ticket plus an incentive to try Qantas again, whether through cash compensation, a flight voucher, upgrade voucher or similar.

Qantas may outsource catering but that doesn't absolve them of the need to make good on the issue - they own the service interface with the customer and any internal insourcing or outsourcing arrangements are Qantas's concern, not the passengers. For example, if I received a poor experience checking in with VA my complaint would rightly be directed at VA and not Toll Dnata.

 

[tehuringa]

Did anyone check if they were included on the packets ingredients?

 

[dajop]

When we had our shop, if someone bought a faulty item, we didn't say "go see xx_xx for a refund". We would refund or whatever. If we shipped a faulty item, we would pay return shipping, as well refunding or replacing the item and re-sending it for free. That's called customer service.

IMO Qantas should have given her a freebie flight, and sent her a big letter of apology, which basically puts the blame on the manufacturer. Win win. For Qantas $400 IS an inconsiderate sum, when it comes to bad press, and very possibly a lawsuit.

Except the Qantas passenger is really paying for the transport services .... it sounds the like the passenger got from A to B and back safely (despite this) so why should QF refund the airfare or pay for a free flight or refund the airfare? The flight didn't drop an engine over Batam or anything like that, which would perhaps be considered faulty goods. $400 sounds entirely reasonable to me. Also I am sure the passenger in question would have also got replacement for the faulty goods ... ie food ... if they felt up to eating it!

Of course if the passenger got sick as a result of this, the compensation element should bear the consequences of that illness.

 

[yo yo ma]

Give her a free flight, then deduct that fare from the next payment to the supplier.

This would be the go but it depends on the contract they have with the supplier.

 

[yo yo ma]

I wonder if there will be a spike in these cases to get the compensation?