Kings College, London second year law student Saima Ahmad went and purchased a multi pack of eight KitKats from her local supermarket for £2 last month and to her surprise there was no wafer in the chocolate…. it was all just plain chocolate.
“Clearly, if I wanted to purchase a confectionery item that is purely chocolate, I would have purchased a bar of Galaxy.”
CLEARLY NESTLE JEEZ! Figure your stuff out!
Saima went on to say:
“I wouldn’t rule out taking this further if Nestle do not apologise or compensate me adequately. They go about advertising the unique concept of KitKat, but I’m so disappointed by what I have purchased. I’m hoping they will apologise to me and in future focus more on quality of their product.”
As like any other annoying law student she went on talking about her ‘rights’ and how the company ‘owes a duty of care’
“The specific duty you owe in consistency in your manufacturing process. The failure to take due care in the manufacturing process resulted in a product being defective. As a result I feel as though I have been misled to part with my money and purchase a product that is clearly different from what has been marketed by Nestle. The loss I have suffered is of monetary and emotional significance.”
As it hapens with any other law student, Saima is probably under a lot of stress and not finding a wafer in her favourite chocolate had probably drover her over the edge. She finally requested:
‘I would therefore like to request a life-long supply of KitKat so that I can act as a means of quality control – it appears you need me more than I need you.’