Posted On: May 25, 2007 by

Contaminated Pet Food Manufacturer Shoots Self In Foot

We wrote recently in this space that pet owners affected by this spring’s huge pet food contamination scandal should avoid rushing to settle with Menu Foods, because they may get a better deal if they file a product liability lawsuit. Well, it looks like the company is not just offering consumers a bad deal -- it’s also trying to illegally harass them into accepting it, through their insurance adjustor, Crawford & Co. A USA Today article last week said Menu Foods is actually bullying pet owners to try to get them to settle:

At a previous hearing on Friday, May 18, the judge had cautioned Menu and Crawford that they should not contact people who had joined one of the lawsuits against the company. Legally, Menu cannot contact those plaintiffs directly but must go through their lawyers.

But in affidavits presented in court Wednesday, pet owners said they received calls that weekend from Crawford representatives who pressed them to answer questions even after being told the owners had hired lawyers. In some cases, the pet owners also received multiple calls from Crawford's computerized phone banks after telling representatives they were represented by attorneys, according to the affidavits.

"Menu's representatives asked owners to sign releases which waived their right to get advice from a lawyer," said attorney Jay Edelson in an interview.

It gets better. The judge in this case, U.S. District Judge Noel Hillman in New Jersey, has ordered Menu to have no contact at all anymore with affected consumers. He had some pretty harsh words for the company in a transcript of court proceedings last week: "It seems to me that Menu Food is out to do whatever Menu Foods wants to do in a way that could adversely impact the rights of possible members of the class action suit.”

Well said. Menu Foods already faces a staggeringly large amount of liability for selling contaminated pet food. Breaking the law has harmed, and will continue to harm, their case even further. It also demonstrates to pet owners that they are not working in good faith to fairly settle the claims that thousands of pet owners have against them -- making a product liability lawsuit the obvious choice.