Plasticizer ruling triggers negative fallout: Chang Guann case leaves consumer protection agencies looking like sick cats
In the Chang Guann Company "fake oil" case, although the Changhua County Health Bureau imposed the heaviest penalty in history at 28.2 million, many consumers question that Kao Chen-li, the person in charge, sold tainted oil until he became a major Taichung landowner, with profits starting at at least 100 billion, so a fine of ten million is a drop in the bucket by comparison, and they argue that a class action lawsuit for compensation should be launched, following the example of the Pang Da Ren case. But after the verdict in the class action lawsuit over the plasticizer incident was released, consumer protection groups now appear lackluster about whether to likewise launch a class action lawsuit for compensation over the Chang Guann "fake oil" storm, and the negative effect on the development of consumer protection in Taiwan, China is expanding.
"Now many manufacturers will talk tough, saying that nothing happened with the plasticizer, so what do we have to fear," said Wang Te-ming, a consumer protection official at the Consumer Protection Committee of the Executive Yuan. He analyzed that the situation of copper chlorophyllin added to Chang Guann fake oil is exactly the same as the plasticizer incident at the time, that is, the victims are unclear, and even if a consumer fell ill because of it, it could not be proven to be directly related to copper chlorophyllin. Even if in the future a class action lawsuit for compensation over the Chang Guann fake oil incident sought an astronomical sum, the judge would probably cite the plasticizer verdict model and would not award too high an amount.
Wang Te-ming said that whether to file a class action lawsuit would be left to consumer protection groups to decide, though he is not optimistic about the verdict. "The verdict in the class action lawsuit over the plasticizer incident left consumer protection groups feeling very frustrated, and tainted-food manufacturers are even more emboldened," Wang Te-ming said.
"It is still too early to file a class action lawsuit against Chang Guann," said Chang Chih-kang, chairman of the Consumers' Foundation. If the compensation conditions proposed by the manufacturer can satisfy consumers, they will choose to settle and will not file a class action lawsuit.
A flavoring industry operator reveals that Chang Guann may have begun adulterating as early as 20 years ago
Although Chang Guann Company allowed consumers to return goods, it required consumers to take the invoice or the original empty bottle to the original store for return or exchange, but many people could not produce the original invoice and therefore could not return the goods, and consumers complained endlessly. Some consumers said they had been loyal customers of Chang Guann for one or two decades and never expected it to be a tainted operator. There was also an operator who had previously been in the spice import business and claimed that 20 years ago Chang Guann had bought peanut flavoring from it, and suspected that the adulteration may have started back then.
Pan Chih-kuan, director of the regional management center of the Food and Drug Administration under the Ministry of Health and Welfare, said that FDA data show there are about 163 related edible oil manufacturing plants across Taiwan, China, and in order to understand whether these oil products also involve adulteration, false labeling and other conditions, notices have been sent to county and city health bureaus to immediately launch major inspections, especially of oil products advertised as 100% pure natural, including inspecting the raw materials, ingredients, manufacturing process, finished product labeling, additives used, warehouses, factories and so on of the operators' products, all of which must be checked, and if there is any doubt about a product, samples must be taken for testing.
Tsai Shu-chen, food section chief of the Food and Drug Administration under the Ministry of Health and Welfare, said that Chang Guann carefully blended proportions of sunflower oil, canola oil, soybean oil and olive oil so that the 12 fatty acid composition ratios of the finished product were almost identical to pure olive oil, evading experts and testing, so it was impossible to rely on testing to expose Chang Guann, and only factory inspections could be used!
Tsai Shu-chen pointed out that in order to crack Chang Guann's secret blended-oil formula, the health bureau carefully compared the purchase quantities, shipment quantities and formula sheets of various raw materials, and if it found that the quantity of olive oil bought and the quantity sold were completely inconsistent, it could prove that the olive oil was adulterated, and other oil types could likewise be exposed one by one using a similar principle.
Chang Guann oil products were "carefully blended", and fake products and genuine products could not be distinguished through testing, only through factory inspection