When a woman didn’t get her way, she started throwing her weight around, targeting one of the world’s largest candy makers, but Nestle isn’t backing down. They had a priceless response for her, and she didn’t like what they had to say. Now, she’s really trying to make them pay.
Saima Ahmad claimed that she had a traumatic experience while biting into a Kit Kat bar. It left a bad taste in her mouth for what was once her favorite chocolate treat. In an attempt to get her fix, she had skipped a modest single pack of the bars, going right for the eight pack instead. But, rather than consuming a hefty dose of calories, she was overcome by what she found to be truly offensive about this particular batch of chocolate.
The 20-year-old law student at Kings College in London claimed that the signature crispy wafer was missing from each of her eight packs of chocolate bars. But, rather than passing it off as a simple production defect, she’s trying to use the situation to fulfill a Willy Wonka-style fantasy, and Nestlé isn’t having any part of it. Ahmad feels like she has legal ground to make the company pay for years to come, citing a legal precedent from the 1930s, Metro reported.
Saima Ahmad is demanding a lifetime supply of Kit Kat bars from Nestle after biting into a bar that didn’t have a wafer. (Photo Credit: Facebook)
“They go about advertising the unique concept of Kit Kat, but I’m so disappointed by what I have purchased,” Saima Ahmad said before demanding much more than an apology, which she’s also mad about not getting. “I’m hoping they will apologize to me and in future focus more on [the] quality of their product. No one else in that industry has that unique concept about mixing the wafer with the chocolate, and that’s why I’m a fan.”
As part of her vindication for being robbed of that crunchy wafer she wanted, she’s insisting that Nestle provides her with a lifetime supply of the bars, which will allow her to act as “quality control” for the company. “They should definitely give into me,” she declared. “I’m hoping my demand will go higher than the customer service platform,” but that’s where her complaint was stopped in its tracks.
Saima Ahmad insisted that she would pursue a legal claim if Nestle does not offer her any compensation for her experience, Huffington Post reported. “I wouldn’t rule out taking this further if Nestle do not apologize or compensate me adequately. As I mentioned in my letter of complaint, an unlimited supply of Kit Kat would do,” she said.
Saima claims that other consumers have complained about similar experiences. “Nestle have a huge following and I don’t think these mistakes are acceptable,” she said. “I have researched this problem and I found that it wasn’t just a one-off and it has happened quite a few times. There are quite a few forums online where people complain of having Kit Kats without wafer.”
Although we were not able to independently verify the travesty of the alleged all-chocolate Kit Kat, a spokesperson for Nestle UK issued a statement to confirm the possibility. “A Kit Kat finger without wafer does leave our factory from time to time but is extremely rare and we have checks in place to try to prevent it happening as far as possible,” the Nestle spokesperson said.
Saima Ahmad or anyone who thinks she has a legitimate court case needs to be smacked with reality. The best-case customer service scenario she can expect is a coupon for another free eight-pack or the reimbursement of what she paid for the chocolate bars. However, to demand a lifetime supply, declaring she will not give up the fight until they “give in,” should negate anything she could have gotten as gratis for her inconvenience.