Two California women claim that Subway’s tuna sandwich actually doesn’t contain “scintilla” from the fish – and that they were duped by the fast-food chain’s allegations, a new $ 5 million lawsuit alleges.
Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin, both from Alameda County, California, say they ordered tuna from the sandwich giant at locations near their home last year, according to a federal lawsuit filed last week in California’s Northern District.
But “independent tests have repeatedly confirmed that the products are made from anything but tuna,” court documents claim.
“The stuffing of the products has no hint of tuna at all,” claims the pack.
In fact, Subway’s tuna is “made from a mixture of different concoctions that do not form tuna, but are mixed by suspects to mimic the appearance of tuna,” court documents claim.
Subway has done this in an effort to save money as the mixed non-tuna product costs less, the petitioner claims.
“Aware that consumers place increased value on tuna as an ingredient, defendants are deliberately making false and misleading claims about the composition of the products in order to increase profits at the expense of unsuspecting buyers,” the complaint said.
Dhanowa and Amin “were tricked into buying food items that were completely lacking the ingredient they reasonably believed they were buying,” court documents claim.
If they had known the truth, they wouldn’t have bought Subway’s tuna or they would have paid a lot less for it, the suit says.
They have made claims of fraud, willful misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation and unjustified enrichment against the company.
The women are asking a judge to allow them to file the charges as a class action so that others who bought Subway’s tuna can also “request a refund of the premium” they paid “for the false and misleading statements made by the women. the suspects about the composition and ingredients of the products, ”court documents claim.
A Subway spokesperson called the allegations ‘baseless’ and ‘frivolous’, adding that they are ‘being prosecuted without due investigation’.
“The allegations in the complaint filed in California are simply untrue,” the spokesman said in a statement. “Subway supplies 100% cooked tuna to its restaurants, which is mixed with mayonnaise and used in freshly made sandwiches, wraps and salads served to and enjoyed by our guests.”
The spokesperson said the quality and flavor of their tuna makes it one of their most popular products.
The allegations “threaten to harm our franchisees, small business owners who work tirelessly to maintain Subway’s high standards for all of its products, including the tuna,” the representative said.
“Unfortunately, this lawsuit is part of a trend where the attorneys for the said plaintiffs are targeting the food industry in an effort to make a name for themselves in that space,” the representative said.
Subway will vigorously defend itself against this and other unfounded attempts to misrepresent and tarnish the high-quality products Subway and its franchisees provide to their customers in California and around the world, and intends to fight these claims through all available roads they are not immediately fired, ”the statement continued.
This isn’t the first legal battle the fast food franchise has faced. In September, the Supreme Court of Ireland ruled that there was too much sugar in the sandwiches to be considered “bread” – a legal distinction that could have given the company a tax advantage.