Uh-oh... Taco Bell lawsuit: Where's the beef?

[Cheshire Figment]

One comment made earlier is that the lead Plaintiff does not want compensation but only wants the advertising to be corrected.

A major question I have is how much money will the law firm want as their fees for the lawsuit, to be collected from Taco Bell. My bet is $3 Million.

 

[BuzzBiteyear]

And here I thought this thread was going to be the lack of quantity of the proteins. I do like Taco Bell actually, but sometimes I look at what I pay for something and think, really, this is all the meat there is on here? Meximelts have gotten ridiculous. Wish I had bought stock in those, they've gone from I want to say 89 cents to $1.59 in about a 3 year period here.

 

[pilesoflaundry]

For .89 you can't expect much else.

I have figured fast food is like cafeteria food in schools, it's not real meat or at least not 100% good meat and that is what you get for cheap and easy. You really get what you pay for with meat.

 

[bicker]

While Taco Bell did okay last year, it leadership only achived 90% of their targets. Remember, there are two sides to the coin: Even if revenue goes up, costs could be going up as well.

 

[LoraJ]

Love Taco Bell, but only eat it a few times/year. This will only bother me if they force Taco Bell to change their meat mixture into something that tastes different.

LOL! Same here.

 

[luvmy3]

I thought I read somewhere(maybe here) from someone that worked at TB that their beef is the lowest grade available.

When you can order off of a dollar menu do you really think you are getting anything other than the lowest grade?
I rarely eat TB but as long as its beef in there and not raccoon or possum I don't care what percentage it its.

 

[BuzzBiteyear]

In my profesion I see that across many industries. But we're talking a 67% increase in 3 years. Other items have increased, but not to that degree. And the quantity you're receiving has done anything but increase. I think it's all an evil plot. By whom, I'm not sure, but definitely evil.

 

[Big Cuddly Bear]

I don't love Taco Bell, and I only eat at one MAYBE once a year, but when I do eat at one, I surely know that an 89 cent taco can't possibly be high quality or good for you. It's just common sense.

I don't really see a big deal, here.

 

[Bell30012]

When I first heard about this on the radio, I was a bit upset and felt deceived by Taco Bell. However, then I thought about it and Whatever it is in the tacos tastes good.

I stopped by Taco Bell and picked up a Grande Meal... 5 soft, 5 hard.

 

[gillep]

I pretty much expect this from all fast food places, I mean somehow they do need to make money on that incredibly cheap meal! It is funny though that my beef tacos that I make at home are also not anywhere near 51% beef as I usually have more onions, peppers, corn, and beans in there than meat to keep them a little bit healthier, and we also prefer the taste!

 

[NHdisneylover]

I think the point is that they're not. They're saying that there is beef in their product, not that their product is beef. The lawsuit is trying to play with words to make it seem like the eatery is doing something wrong.

35% beef is still beef.

(And is 35% too much beef as far as I'm concerned, but that's irrelevant.)

That is simply not necessarily true. Some people might like it to be that way, but there is no requirement nor any sound basis for assuming that anything provided by anyone always has one ingredient that makes up >50% of the whole, unless there is an explicit promise to that effect. Ingredient lists, if they are indeed ingredient lists in Nutritional Facts, must show ingredients in order of prevalence, but again the first ingredient need not represent >50%.

Well Ican agree with you taht any aamount of beef is too much--given taht I haven't eaten any since 1988 or 89 (not sure excatly when I had my last beef item but i know it was during that shcool year some time).
I also agree that it is probably totally legal to call it "seasoned beef" (thus my comment that it is not worth a law suit--while still explaining why I think it is wrong and deceptive). It USED to be illegal to call a "fake" version of a food (or one that contained such a small percentage of the real thing) the food iteslf--manufacturer's used to have to label those items as "immitation" or "XYZ product" (remember when Velvetta was a cheese product?). Sadly, laws on that have changed--and far too many consumers really do not know what is real from what is not. Persoanlly, I think the law should change back. If you want to eat beef, or beef mixed with 65% other junk FINE--but you should be made aware of what you are eating (and plainly so--not in tiny type).

And, yes, I do know how ingredient labels work. Most of the time a product is not named only for its most common ingedient. Cookies are not called "flavored flour," soda is not called "falvoured and colored high fructies corn syrup" etc I think "beef falvoured filling" would be fine--but, to ME, "seasoned beef" does indicate BEEF as a majority of the product.

I pretty much expect this from all fast food places, I mean somehow they do need to make money on that incredibly cheap meal! It is funny though that my beef tacos that I make at home are also not anywhere near 51% beef as I usually have more onions, peppers, corn, and beans in there than meat to keep them a little bit healthier, and we also prefer the taste!

If someone asked you to tell them wha twas in your tacos (describe them--not give the full recipe) would you say "beef in tortillas with sauce" or would you say "beef and veggies in torillas with sauce" This is the issue, Taco Bell describes their food as being made with seasoned beef, cheese and sauce (or what have you--but they pretty much call the beef like filling just "seasoned beef" without refering to any of the other 65%).

 

[Aimros]

I haven't eaten beef in 3 years and I haven't eaten beef from a fast food restaurant in about 5 years, but this actually makes me feel a lot better about the tacos I once ate at Taco Bell - at least I was mostly eating oats and not nasty beef.

 

[Mrs. Darcy]

The additive is oats? That doesn't sound so bad. Their ratio of beef to oatmeal to make a taco must work because it tastes so good!

 

[Imzadi]

The additive is oats? That doesn't sound so bad. Their ratio of beef to oatmeal to make a taco must work because it tastes so good!

That and the other 50% of spices.


I just saw a commercial for Kentucky Fried Chicken. I wonder how long before we see a lawsuit claiming that KFC is not really make with "chicken."

 

[cm8]

That and the other 50% of spices.


I just saw a commercial for Kentucky Fried Chicken. I wonder how long before we see a lawsuit claiming that KFC is not really make with "chicken."

here here, that was the claim back in the days when it was first called Kentucky Fried Chicken. They had to change the name to KFC when they started using artificial chicken. About a few years back they switched back to using real chicken in everything except the chicken fingers if I may recall correctly

 

[*BTMRR*]

here here, that was the claim back in the days when it was first called Kentucky Fried Chicken. They had to change the name to KFC when they started using artificial chicken. About a few years back they switched back to using real chicken in everything except the chicken fingers if I may recall correctly

That's another urban myth. It's completely untrue, and though I am not a fan of KFC I really despise urban myths. They unnecessarily bring harm to businesses and the people who work there.

 

[NHdisneylover]

That's another urban myth. It's completely untrue, and though I am not a fan of KFC I really despise urban myths. They unnecessarily bring harm to businesses and the people who work there.

Yes. They went to KFC to deemphasize the fried part of the name as people were becoming more concerned with their health (sort of kinda). Sad taht parts of the American public are more likely to eat hte same friend food (how can you NOT know it is fried?) just if the word is not as in your face.

 

[bicker]

It USED to be illegal to call a "fake" version of a food (or one that contained such a small percentage of the real thing) the food iteslf

That was never true arbitrarily. Rather there have been specific thresholds set. For example, ice cream must have X% milk fat, etc. Otherwise it is ice milk. It's never been something that would depend on any random consumer deciding that they personally didn't like the percentage, and that's what I object to in this lawsuit, the consumer putting themselves in the position of unilaterally imposing rules on suppliers, instead of deferring to society's established rules, and the terms and conditions of the offer made.

And I know of no case where such thresholds pertaining to food have been relaxed in any way: I believe that all those rules you're talking about are still in effect. The rules simply don't apply, in this case, because Taco Bell is not doing anything wrong.

If you know of any such law-roll-backs, I'd love to know about them. I can't think of one.

 

[NHdisneylover]

That was never true arbitrarily. Rather there have been specific thresholds set. For example, ice cream must have X% milk fat, etc. Otherwise it is ice milk. It's never been something that would depend on any random consumer deciding that they personally didn't like the percentage, and that's what I object to in this lawsuit, the consumer putting themselves in the position of unilaterally imposing rules on suppliers, instead of deferring to society's established rules, and the terms and conditions of the offer made.

And I know of no case where such thresholds pertaining to food have been relaxed in any way: I believe that all those rules you're talking about are still in effect. The rules simply don't apply, in this case, because Taco Bell is not doing anything wrong.

If you know of any such law-roll-backs, I'd love to know about them. I can't think of one.

Well, iwas thinking of the law rollbacks that are discussed in the book In Defense of Food. I have not checked that author;s sources--but felt it seemed to be a well documented book and it was pretty popular. I would think if such blatantly false claims were being made they would have been publicly called out, but maybe not

I will have to reread the article in the OP. I thought the suit specified that in the case of taco bell tehir seasoned beef does not have enough beef in it to meet the FDA requirenment (and is therefore not just "a customer putting herself in teh position of unilaterally imposing rules").

ETA--yes the article does state that the beef does not meet the minumum legal standard:
"The meat mixture sold by Taco Bell restaurants contains binders and extenders and does not meet the minimum requirements set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to be labeled as "beef," according to the legal complaint"

 

[bicker]

Well, iwas thinking of the law rollbacks that are discussed in the book In Defense of Food. I have not checked that author;s sources--but felt it seemed to be a well documented book and it was pretty popular. I would think if such blatantly false claims were being made they would have been publicly called out, but maybe not

I've read the book, and I don't remember anything about actual real laws about ingredient contents. If I remember correctly, he talked a lot about how the laws are often ignored and not adequately enforced. Perhaps that's what you're remembering?

I will have to reread the article in the OP. I thought the suit specified that in the case of taco bell tehir seasoned beef does not have enough beef in it to meet the FDA requirenment

It doesn't have enough beef to meet one of the requirements, but that requirement doesn't apply to the context that is being complained about. The way it appears to me, the complainant is applying the rules regarding ingredient lists to product descriptions, instead. The ingredient lists provided are accurate and compliant.

ETA--yes the article does state that the beef does not meet the minumum legal standard:
"The meat mixture sold by Taco Bell restaurants contains binders and extenders and does not meet the minimum requirements set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to be labeled as "beef," according to the legal complaint"

The product is not being sold as "beef". It is being sold as Crunchy Taco (for example).