Crapbury's II

> I doubt that Cadbury's is entirely to blame for the addition of shit to

> > their foodstuff no matter how reprehensible we all find their conduct > > since January. > > I once had a lecturer at Uni who did consultancy work for Cadbury > (~10yrs agoi). He claimed that the hygene standards at their factory > were pretty poor and that they didn't care too much. He claimed that > they believed there was little risk because the fat and sugar content > of the chocolate was so high that nothing could "breed" in the > chocolate anyway. I'm not sure about the science behind that, but it's > interesting considering recent events.

I was talking to an electrician at work today about the news this morning about Cadbury's. He said he worke in a (fairly) local factory where they make cakes. He said that he and another workmate had to renew th trunking over the production lines.

When asked how long they'd be he said as long as it takes, there were only the two of them to do the whole job.

They just shrugged and let them get on with it and never closed the line for them or anything. He said all the debris in the runs fell onto the food. So it isn't just the choccy that they have a major health problem in.

That's just the one they got caught with.

Reply to
Weatherlawyer
Loading thread data ...

Bloody hell, thats not the one just outside Worcester is it ?

Dave

Reply to
gort

The suit speaking on behalf of Crapburys yesterday was complacent beyond the point of being smug. His only interest in the slamonella outbreak was the potential to harm profits and he spent most of his talks on Radio 4 and News 24 trying to soothe the shareholders.

He also suffered a severe memory lapse since he kept referring to Cadbury's full cooperation with the FSA and also stated that they had taken immediate action.

Funny definition he had of both "immediate" and "cooperation."

Reply to
Steve Firth

I rather think it was a little further north but what is the name of the place exactly? I wonder if I am dropping the man in the cadbury. They can't have all that many electrical upgrades can they?

I used to eat Cadbury's whole nut chocolate and salmonella all the time. Now I am both nut and milk intolerant. I wonder if that was the cause.

Reply to
Weatherlawyer

The one outside Worcester makes cakes, but its not Cadburys. Phew!!!

Dave

Reply to
gort

I asked the man today and he said it was in Speke near Liverpool. And it was years ago.

Reply to
Weatherlawyer

And these sort of tales aren't restricted to Cadburys - I've heard them from all over the food industry.

cheers, clive

Reply to
Clive George

Every reason to disbelieve them then?

Or is it: "At the mouths of two or three witnesess a case is proven"?

What might have been the case is that they were prepared to consign part of a run to the pet-food industry rather than stop the machines. It is hard to belive that a line is open to the air unless it is an inspection line.

Why would they have food conveyed that way when the process can be better controlled under cover if cooling was required?

However there is a saying that if you send in your purchase food companies will send you a case back if the complaint was genuine.

Once the company has the offending article, there will be no evidence. And any replacement over the amount due will look like compensation, if accepted.

It all smells of that Ford Escort(? US version) fiasco, that had a dodgy petrol tank. If a company could weather that, Cadbury's are sure to get over it quickly enough.

Reply to
Weatherlawyer

The message from "Weatherlawyer" contains these words:

Pinto.

Reply to
Guy King

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.