It has been reported that McDonald’s Corp. is lying to its customers about what they’re actually buying when they purchase the fast-food chain’s chicken breast filet sandwiches, salads and wraps, according to a proposed class action in New York on Tuesday alleging the premium-priced products also include rib meat. Consumers King Ho Yip and Anna Hennigan say that McDonald’s is holding out some of its sandwiches, like an “artisan grilled chicken sandwich” and a “bacon ranch grilled chicken salad,” as being made with “100 percent chicken breast filet,” when the meat in those menu items is actually a blend between breast and rib, according to the recent McDonald’s lawsuit.
The company is using that “100 percent chicken breast filet” labeling as a way to indicate the products with the designation are superior to, say, the McChicken sandwich, and the idea that a meat of perceived higher quality was used compels customers to spend more money on the items, the consumers said.
“Defendants’ schemes or artifices to defraud plaintiff and other members of the proposed class consist of systemic and continuing practices of disseminating false and misleading information [in advertisements], all of which are intended to trick unsuspecting consumers,” the consumers said.
The company promotes its artisan chicken and crispy buttermilk chicken sandwiches, salads and wraps with the “100 percent” advertising on television, in stores and elsewhere, the consumers said.
And that categorization of the meat in those menu items, the consumers said, goads them into spending more for what they thought was a superior-quality product, according to the suit.
The McDonald’s website lists the ingredients of at least some of the menu items named in the consumers’ suit as including “boneless skinless chicken breast with rib meat” in its ingredients and nutrition section; the website menu didn’t include claims about a “100 percent chicken breast filet.”
It’s not the first time the Golden Arches has faced a proposed consumer class action. Earlier this year, consumers in Illinois accused McDonald’s of falsely marketing their Extra Value Meals as discounted when the same meals are cheaper purchased a la carte. That suit has a motion to dismiss pending, according to its docket.
And in 2016, in a similar strain as the instant suit, a consumer alleged that the mozzarella sticks sold at McDonald’s restaurants do not contain actual mozzarella cheese in spite of advertisements that suggest otherwise.
Customer Chris Howe said in his February 2016 suit in California that McDonald’s advertises and labels the item as being made with “pure mozzarella,” “real mozzarella” and “100 percent real cheese,” even though they are actually composed of something else, according to the complaint in that case. The suit ended when Howe filed a stipulation for dismissal in October 2016, though no details of a possible settlement were made public in court records.
A representative for McDonald’s didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment after business hours on Tuesday.
The consumers are represented by John Troy of Troy Law PLLC.
Counsel information for the defendants could not be immediately determined.
The case is King Ho Yip et al. v. McDonald’s Corp. et al., case number 1:17-cv-06464, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
The above was first reported by Law360.
Editor’s note on the McDonald’s Lawsuit:
This piece is written about the recent McDonald’s Lawsuit. If you are considered eligible to be among the class of consumers described in the class action, you may eventually be able to participate in receiving any compensation the court may award.
If you have any questions concerning this process or wish to speak with a law firm that has either filed or intends to handle this matter, please feel free to contact us via email at ConsiderTheConsumer@gmail.com.
Similarly, if you believe to have been affected by the actions above, please contact us immediately via our complaint portal or directly through email at ConsiderTheConsumer@gmail.com.