Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Salisbury Steaks — Where’s the Beef?

MrConsumer has never purchased frozen Salisbury steak dinners, but having read a story from Truth in Advertising about their ingredients, he became curious.

I always (foolishly) assumed that the burger-like patties in these dinners were made from beef. But nay, nay.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Lean Cuisine Salisbury steak

In fact, Lean Cuisine’s patty is made from beef and pork.

Worse news came when checking the ingredients statements of some other Salisbury steak dinners.

*MOUSE PRINT:

On-Cor Salisbury steak
Banquet Salisbury steak

In these products, beef was no longer the first ingredient in the patties — in fact, it was the last ingredient among the main contents. There was more chicken, pork and water in each patty than beef!

All is not bad news for Salisbury steak lovers. Stouffer’s boldly promotes that its patties are made with 100% beef.

Stouffer's Salisbury steak

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Post Is Skimping on Cereal Servings Per Box Says Lawsuit

A New York consumer is suing Post over allegedly misleading claims for one of its breakfast cereals. (See complaint.)

The cereal in question, 19.5-ounce “family size” boxes of Post Fruity Pebbles, is supposed to have enough cereal for 15 one-cup bowls of cereal.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Fruity Pebbles label

The consumer’s lawyers contend, however, that it has far less.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Fruity Pebbles allegations

They hired an independent testing lab which determined that the cereal is denser than the label indicates, so you actually only get 11.3 one-cup serving per box, and thus the claimed amount of calories, sugar, and sodium is far higher per serving than represented.

Fruity Pebbles difference

So, the company is being sued for false and misleading statements and unjust enrichment under New York law. They are asking the judge for refunds and corrective advertising.

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Domino’s Sued Over Junk Fees

Recently a California consumer sued Domino’s for advertising one price on their menu but tacking on a junk fee to his bill that upped the price. [See complaint.]

*MOUSE PRINT:

Domino's bill

On his bill was the expected sales/meals tax, but then a second line was labeled “Tax 2.” According to the lawsuit:

Moreover, once the “Tax 2” amount appeared on the receipt, the representation of the Junk Fee as a “tax” lead Mr. Murphy to believe that “Tax 2” was a mandatory charge imposed by the government that was required to be paid on the transaction by him. The representation of the
Junk Fee as a “Tax” was also material to Mr. Murphy.

When Mr. Murphy paid for the two pizzas and the breadsticks in cash at checkout, he was charged two “tax” amounts. In addition to sales tax, Mr. Murphy was charged a “Tax 2” amount that, although deceptively and misleadingly labeled as “Tax,” was in reality a Junk Fee charged by Defendants to offset their own business expenses.

Under California’s “Honest Pricing Act” additional junk fees are illegal because businesses are prohibited from “[a]dvertising, displaying, or offering a price for a good or service that does not include all mandatory fees or charges.” Cal. Civ. Code § 1770(a)(29)(A).

Domino’s is being sued for unfair business practices, violation of the new complete pricing law, and the state false advertising law. The consumer’s lawyers are seeking refunds and damages, and an order stopping Domino’s from continuing to charge any illegal extra fees.

Share this story:

 

ADV