• Country Maid Announces Voluntary Nationwide Recall of Classic Breaks® Peanut Butter Cookie Dough Due to Possible Health Risk
• Nature's Path Recalls Peanut Butter Optimum Energy Bars Nationwide Because of Possible Health Risk
• Meijer Announces Voluntary Recall for Some Meijer Brand Peanut Butter Crackers and Ice Cream Because of Possible Health Risk
• Abbott Nutrition Announces Voluntary Recall of ZonePerfect® Chocolate Peanut Butter Bars, ZonePerfect® Peanut Toffee Bars and NutriPals™ Peanut Butter Chocolate Bars in U.S., Mexico, New Zealand and Singapore
• Kroger Recalls Select Ice Cream Products Due to Possible Health Risk
• Clif Bar & Company Announces Voluntary Nationwide Recall of CLIF® and LUNA® Branded Bars Containing Peanut Butter Due to Possible Health Risk
• Evening Rise Bread Co. Recalls Peanut Butter Cookies and Bars Because of Possible Health Risk
• more

At least they have in the past.

 

OK, So we've gone from peanut butter,to spinach, to salsa, and now back to peanut butter. I wonder what the dart will hit next.

JWG

This PB deal is BS.  But hold on to your hats for the bottled water fiasco.

As the jingle said: "Have another nutter butter peanut butter sandwich cookie."

Unfortunately...or I guess, realistically and righfully, most alleged widespreaed food product defects or contaminations will not land in an IA's hands. If it does, it will be a 1-time deal with a very high-paid expert in the field, who is not reallly an IA as we all view it. That same expert will handle the C&O at the alleged sites of contamination(s). While there may be claimants across many states, they will be coming forth via the info-mercial solicitations by the law firms several months after the fact. The local IA may receive an assignment here and there, but it will ultimately be tendered back to the source of the product. So, yes, if a small Mom & Pop doesn't recognize it early enough, they might call their own carrier before telling the claimant to contact the proper source.  There are those exceptions of course, when the owner's pet cat happens to wander too close to the meat grinder while Sal is outside having a smoke.  As parts of Tabby's collar begin to show up in the taco salads, and the shells are a little bit furry, the local IA probably tends to get a little busy.  Never accept a free meal or sample in these situations, nor even a beverage produced on the premises.  It is permissable, however, to share a 6-pack with the insured in the back alley while out of the sight of local authorities...as long as you purchased it, and the insured donated the cigars that were going to go bad due to weather conditions anyway.

Actually, how an IA may become involved is this: XYZ Company, manufacturer of peanut butter, hires a large adjusting firm like GAB or Crawford. They, rather than committing their regular staff to an assignment that might tie them up for years, hire some independents with casualty as well as property experience and bring them into a central location. There they process and evaluate the claims as they come in. The ultimate settlement will likely be dictated by XYZ and/or their insurance carrier, and you pay the claim in accordance with their wishes. It is primarily a desk job similar to claims examining on a major hurricane, doing litigation files after a major event, handling a major environmental loss like the Exxon Valdiz, or a large FEMA exposure like the Los Alamos Wildfires.

I heard on a radio broadcast tonight that the PB production facility (don't know which or where) was aware of salmonella presence, but was not legally required to report it.  They were legally required to test for it, but not required to report it.  OK, that means they began the recalls, but they were not legally required to make the recalls nor legally responsible if they didn't?  So, is it such an isolated or small exposure to illlness, that it becomes the decision of the producer whether or not to make it public and to take responsibility?  Apparently so, and thus explains the high self-insured liability limiits of your P&G's, etc. How many times have you blamed something on the flu, or something you ate, but were never aware that somewhere across our nation there were another 5000 people with the same problems?  Generally, it's a minor inconvenience and not life threatening, but maybe pretty widespread and never associated with the cause because of the "non-required" reporting.   Is that a bad thing?  Probably not if you think back over the past 200 years and the improved packaging & shipping conditions.   Depending on the person, the alleged contaminated product may or may not make them sick...particularly peanut butter, which is notarious anyway in the world of allergenics & hypochondriacs.

The firm of Nguyen Kanwe Skrewm will have a hayday with this one. Watch your local cable infomercials late at night for details.