Breadtalk got PAP immunity, CASE don't dare to touch. Only gets "stern warning"

Because got one PAP MP and one former PAP MP on its board of directors. CASE don't dare to touch Breadtalke.

BreadTalk gets stern warning from Case




Mr Seah Seng Choon


PUBLISHED
5 HOURS AGO

Jessica Lim

The Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) has issued a strongly- worded warning to bakery BreadTalk, informing the firm that its recent actions were in breach of the law. It also warned the company that it would take action should such "flagrant breaches" continue.

The bakery chain came under fire for selling soya bean milk from Yeo's in bottles labelled "freshly prepared" at many of its outlets.

A video of a BreadTalk worker pouring the drink from a Yeo's carton into the bottles, which was widely circulated on the Internet, had sparked off the angry reaction.

​

The letter, sent out by the consumer watchdog yesterday, called for a meeting with the company to "discuss the matter".

In the two-page letter, Case detailed how BreadTalk had breached the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act (CPFTA). Under this Act, it is an unfair practice for BreadTalk to do or say anything to deceive or mislead a consumer, or make a false claim.

"The questionable practice by BreadTalk is unacceptable," said Case executive director Seah Seng Choon. "By indicating the words 'freshly prepared' on the bottles, consumers may reasonably be deceived or misled to believe that the soya bean milk was freshly brewed in-house and therefore commands a higher value than Yeo's pre-packed soya bean milk."
"Under the CPFTA, a court may award the consumer damages in the amount of any loss or damage suffered by the consumer as a result of the said unfair practice," he said.

Case also has the authority to take up court orders against errant retailers to stop unfair business practices.

The BreadTalk Group could not be reached for comment.

Earlier, CASE said BreadTalk is in breach of the law, but CASE don't dare to pursue it!!??

Case issues warning to BreadTalk over repackaging of soya bean milk

Bakery chain BreadTalk has been warned by the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) over its soya bean drink, after it was found out that the so-called freshly prepared drink was actually taken from packets of Yeo's soya bean milk. PHOTO: ST FILE

Jessica Lim
Consumer Correspondent

SINGAPORE - BreadTalk has been informed that their recent actions were in breach of the law.

The bakery chain was also warned by the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) that it would take action should such "flagrant breaches" continue.
News broke earlier this week that the 46-outlet chain's so-called fresh soya drink was actually Yeo's brand soya bean milk repackaged into bottles. The bottles had the words "freshly prepared" on them.



In the two-page letter, Case detailed how BreadTalk had breached the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act .

Under the Act, it is an unfair practice for BreadTalk to do or say anything to deceive or mislead a consumer, or make a false claim.

"The questionable practice by BreadTalk is unacceptable," said Mr Seah Seng Choon. "By indicating the words "freshly prepared" on the bottles, consumers may reasonably be deceived or misled to believe that the soya bean milk was freshly brewed in-house and therefore command a higher value than Yeo's pre-packed soya bean milk."

Under the Act, a court may award the consumer damages in the amount of any loss or damage suffered by the consumer as a result of the said unfair practice. Case also has the authority to take up court orders against errant retailers to stop unfair business practices.

BreadTalk could not be reached for comment.

They also have a "big shot" nincompoop who loves the toothpicks of one of the restaurants in their group.

BOYCOTT!

Incarcerate the cronies of PAP!

Find me another person who can rammed his sports car into police car while drunk and get away with it.
George Quek is one of the untouchable elites.

Narong Wongwan said:

Find me another person who can rammed his sports car into police car while drunk and get away with it.

Click to expand...

How did he do that?

The PAPzis won't touch him; so shouldn't we, i.e. we don't touch his stuff.

I've never bought anything from BreadTalk. Others might want to consider a similar cause of action.

Also, CASE intervened to save his skin. If it had not done so, he would suffer the same vigilante justice, or worse, as Jover Chew.

Narong Wongwan said:

Find me another person who can rammed his sports car into police car while drunk and get away with it.
George Quek is one of the untouchable elites.

Click to expand...

so easy to be untouchable elite?whats his networth?cant be more than 100m.

zhihau said:

How did he do that?

Click to expand...

Aqua face George donated spare change $4000.
If lesser mortal his ass will be in jail already regardless if he was driving a Porsche or not

CASE sure scare to touch cos they hv TOP SECRET

Another degree mill but this time it is soya mill. As long as they put effort in pouring into the bottle, it is considered genuine.

rambo22 said:

CASE sure scare to touch cos they hv TOP SERCRET

Click to expand...

actually can this case be classified as CHEATING or not

just like sim lim hp case

I've never been a Breadtalk or Toast Box customer, not even once.

Narong Wongwan said:

Find me another person who can rammed his sports car into police car while drunk and get away with it.
George Quek is one of the untouchable elites.

Click to expand...

The pappies love their cronies, towkays, rich Indon crooks flush with dirty money etc.

They all have plenty of dignity.

tanakow said:

Another degree mill but this time it is soya mill. As long as they put effort in pouring into the bottle, it is considered genuine.

Click to expand...

Btw Aqua face also got a fake doctorate.....but given recent heat his Dr title quietly dropped

rambo22 said:

actually can this case be classified as CHEATING or not

just like sim lim hp case

Click to expand...

Jover Chew is not an untouchable elite.....therein lies the difference between 2 cheats

HTOLAS said:

The PAPzis won't touch him; so shouldn't we, i.e. we don't touch his stuff.

I've never bought anything from BreadTalk. Others might want to consider a similar cause of action.

Also, CASE intervened to save his skin. If it had not done so, he would suffer the same vigilante justice, or worse, as Jover Chew.

Click to expand...

breadtalk items are expensive. i prefer four leaves.

rambo22 said:

actually can this case be classified as CHEATING or not

just like sim lim hp case

Click to expand...

BreadTalk did not clarify if the soya bean milk that they sell was fresh or preserved. They admitted that YHS was one of their vendors. Obviously, it's not an offence to use OEM and repackaging your OEM's products as your products as long as their is a contract in place.

However, it's an entirely different story if YHS gave them preserved soya bean milk, and the preserved soya bean milk was legally repackaged but illegally sold as fresh soya bean milk.


Cheating

415. Whoever, by deceiving any person, whether or not such deception was the sole or main inducement, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit to do if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to any person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat”.
[51/2007]

Explanation 1.—A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section.
Explanation 2.—Mere breach of contract is not of itself proof of an original fraudulent intent.
Explanation 3.—Whoever makes a representation through any agent is to be treated as having made the representation himself.

[51/2007]

Illustrations

(a)A, by falsely pretending to be in the Government service, intentionally deceives Z, and thus dishonestly induces Z to let him have on credit goods for which he does not mean to pay. A cheats.

(b)A, by putting a counterfeit mark on an article, intentionally deceives Z into a belief that this article was made by a certain celebrated manufacturer, and thus dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article. A cheats.

(c)A, by exhibiting to Z a false sample of an article, intentionally deceives Z into believing that the article corresponds with the sample, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article. A cheats.

(d)A, by tendering in payment for an article a bill on a house with which A keeps no money, and by which A expects that the bill will be dishonoured, intentionally deceives Z, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to deliver the article, intending not to pay for it. A cheats.

(e)A, by pledging as diamonds articles which he knows are not diamonds, intentionally deceives Z, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to lend money. A cheats.

(f)A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to repay any money that Z may lend to him, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to lend him money, A not intending to repay it. A cheats.

(g)A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to deliver to Z a certain quantity of pepper which he does not intend to deliver, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to advance money upon the faith of such delivery. A cheats; but if A, at the time of obtaining the money, intends to deliver the pepper, and afterwards breaks his contract and does not deliver it, he does not cheat, but is liable only to a civil action for breach of contract.

(h)A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A has performed A’s part of a contract made with Z, which he has not performed, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to pay money. A cheats.

(i)A sells and conveys an estate to B. A, knowing that in consequence of such sale he has no right to the property, sells or mortgages the same to Z without disclosing the fact of the previous sale and conveyance to B, and receives the purchase or mortgage money from Z. A cheats.

(j)A, playing with false dice, or marked cards, wins money from B. A cheats.

Narong Wongwan said:

Find me another person who can rammed his sports car into police car while drunk and get away with it.
George Quek is one of the untouchable elites.

Click to expand...

Never bite the hand that feeds. Ah qua George had a big say on their pay. Dr Quek. Dont play play. A genius.

If u are rich the PAP loves u and gives free publicity. I enjoy bashing the pets of the PAP but since there are many doing it, i'll just sit back and have a cuppa.