Raise Your Hand If You’ve Been Personally Victimized By Nestle “Recklessly” Underfilling Boxes Of Raisinets
Fox News - A California woman has sued food and drink giant Nestle, claiming that the company purposefully deceives customers by “recklessly” underfilling its boxes of Raisinets candy.
According to Law360, Hafer alleges that the “opaque packaging of Nestle USA Inc.’s Raisinets candies leads customers to believe they are buying a full box of the chocolate-coated raisins when, in fact, the box is only 60 percent full.”
Since customers can’t really see the contents of each box of candy until after it’s opened, “approximately 40 percent each [Raisinets’] packaging is non-functional slack-fill — empty space which serves no functional purpose under the law,” according to the suit.
The lawsuit contends that Nestle’s “deceptive packaging” violates California’s false advertising and unfair competition laws.
Hafer, who is represented by Barbara A. Rohr and Benjamin Heikali of Faruqi & Faruqi Los Angeles’ office, is seeking at least $5 million in refunds and any interest accrued from previous purchases.
You know what, in a world of wacky lawsuits and unsubstantiated claims…this one just makes sense. It makes complete sense. Who hasn’t been at the movies, popped open a box of Nets, and been like “oh what the fuckkkkkkk?” Every single point in the lawsuit makes perfect sense. They are RECKLESSLY underfilling them. I love that terminology. Recklessly. The same way it’s reckless to drink and drive or dive into the shallow end, what Raisenets is doing is down right dangerous.
They are misleading the shit out of the public. We trust them to fulfill our chocolate coated raisins needs with dignity. With morals. With respect. And what do they do? Spit in our eyeballs. Make us look like idiots. Make us feel like we just got punched in the face in an underground boxing match.
My favorite part is that it’d downright unlawful, and the reasoning sounds like something out of the Charlie Kelly playbook. “Raisinets’ packaging is non-functional slack-fill — empty space which serves no functional purpose under the law”
Non-functional slack-fill?! I’ll take that advise under cooperation, alright? I DEMAND satisfaction!
At the end of the day, hopefully we start taking steps to fill up the boxes. Not make them smaller, but fill up what we have. It’s the least they can do. It’s like candy reparations. We are owed a lot of back-candy for the half-filled boxes eaten by our ancestors.