Wendy's restaurant chain has solved the mystery of the finger allegedly found in a bowl of chille. According to a report from the BBC the finger belonged to a family friend of Anna Ayala, the woman whose claims and lawsuit against the food outlet have cost it millions of dollars in lost sales, resulting in the laying off of staff members.
Ms Ayala claimed she had bitten down on the finger which she described as "kind of hard, crunchy". She said the incident had caused her "great emotional distress". She has since withdrawn her lawsuit. The fast food chain has insisted all along that the finger did not originate at one of its establishments as no staff had lost a digit and no suppliers had reported any hand accidents.
The IPKat observes that franchises are always more vulnerable to this sort of thing, since the brand name is ubiquitous and a slander on the reputation of just one of its licensees can rub off on all of them.
Edible fingers here , here and here
Inedible finger here
Ms Ayala claimed she had bitten down on the finger which she described as "kind of hard, crunchy". She said the incident had caused her "great emotional distress". She has since withdrawn her lawsuit. The fast food chain has insisted all along that the finger did not originate at one of its establishments as no staff had lost a digit and no suppliers had reported any hand accidents.
The IPKat observes that franchises are always more vulnerable to this sort of thing, since the brand name is ubiquitous and a slander on the reputation of just one of its licensees can rub off on all of them.
Edible fingers here , here and here
Inedible finger here
FINGER POINTS TO AYALA
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Saturday, May 14, 2005
Rating:
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html