Skip to main content

Del Monte wants to sue Chinese Jerky Manufacturer?

Related News


  1. Laurie Matson

    I am going to stick my neck out here and say it is 50/50!! No Chinese Farmers should NOT be using illegal drugs and certainly not in the gross amounts they have been using. and yes, US manufacturers should have their feet on the ground in China testing feed, reviewing what drugs they are using and making every effort to assure their treats will be safe. However, that may not be effective since the Chinese will always present what the US Companies WANT to see and generally think nothing of Lying and fooling the US Businesses and the American People!!!

  2. Marsha

    My personal opinion is that Del Monte should have tested all treats and ingredients before putting any treat up for sale on the open market. And if the Chinese would not let them then they should have walked away from purchasing from China. It is time in this country to quit using Chinese products. Bring back jobs to this country and we have more than enough food in this country to make great pet food.

  3. Gitta

    As long as the pet food company is busy touting their “quality control” and drowning us with beautified advertising – they are on the hook in my opinion. No passing the rotten egg. They can’t have it both ways. They can’t tell us what a wonderful and safe product they are offering us and when the you-know-what hits the fan cowardly hide behind some legalese.

    But as long as the consumer suffers from short-term memory there is no incentive to change. Scandal after scandal proves these companies right. Just ride it out – the consumer will be back in no time. So, 50% of the blame lies with the consumer.

  4. Woofielover

    So, just curious to get everyone’s take on this… Let’s go a step further… Should the reseller/retailer be held responsible as well? Where does the responsibility begin and end? Every step along the way involves someone new – supplier, manufacturer, co-packer, packager, distributor, retailer, consumer. Where does the blame begin and end? The supplier who provides tainted ingredients, the manufacturer who uses those tainted ingredients to make the end product, the co-packer, someone the manufacturer hires to make a portion of the line because the manufacturer doesn’t have the equipment, the packager who uses packaging which, by the way, can be problematic to the product within (i.e. improper seals, toxic sealants, leaching, BPA, etc.), the distributor who is responsible to appropriately house and transport the goods so as not to corrupt or deteriorate the product, the retailer who orders, stocks and sells the product, the consumer who purchases the product, with or without research, information or knowledge as to any of the steps up to the purchase and then feeds the product to the pets? I’m just interested in the feedback and point of view of anyone interested in weighing in. Full Disclosure: I am a retailer and owner of many pets. But, I do the research (which is extensive and constant and as in depth as can be done without going undercover as an employee) and choose not to sell products from manufacturers that lack integrity or have poor track records – of which there are many. I also don’t carry brands I would carry if not for the fact that they are exclusively distributed by a distributor of poor repute. But I have often wondered who should or should not be included in the chain of responsibility. Thanks!

    1. Dianne

      Well, we can’t hold our pets accountable. They are at least of the hook. Although I have had a supplier of spray millet tell me that birds will generally not eat bad seed!!!

  5. Regina

    OK, Let me see if I understand this. Del Monte had an agreement with the Chinese that pretty much said, “if there’s a problem with the food made my the Chinese, then the Chinese are the only ones to blame”

    Sooooo, Del Monte wanted cheap product, and didn’t want to do due diligence, so they just drafted a contract that pretty much admits they’re not even involved in producing the actual product, so why would they get any blame???

    Well, in my book, if you want your brand name on a product, there should be more involvement than just a piece of paper and a pen.


    1. Regina

      oops, should say “made BY the Chinese” not “made by the Chinese”

  6. jennifer

    I’m glad they are suing. Maybe the manufacturer will learn to be more careful. You know, that country loves corporal punishment – maybe on top of suing, they should go over there and literally kick ass. They would understand that. But I also think that Del Monte should learn the same lessons. Why can’t everyone involved be more careful? It would only improve the quality of the product. I hope they do sue them til it hurts. China is becoming the richest country in the world – because they sell overpriced crap to us, and we send them all of our jobs. We need to make them understand that we have standards. Of course, it might help if we regained the standards and pride that we once had years ago. Now it’s all about cost-effective and convenient. I want the quality of pet food and ppl food to improve here, and I don’t care what needs to happen for that, but it needs to happen. Everyone needs to be responsible. Everyone needs to do their homework, as you said. There should be quality checkpoints around every corner in the food manufacturing – and shipping, etc. And it needs to be trustworthy, not just mark a piece of paper and send the product off w out really looking at it. Can we trust these ppl from Del Monte and China? I’m thinking that if Del Monte sues, maybe they will lose their contract and have to find another. Hopefully Del Monte will have learned and will be more careful in who they work w in the future, and will demand better quality. Maybe this will be a good step in the right direction for pet food?

  7. Peter

    Del Monte made an agreement with a Chinese-based supplier in order to get products made as cheaply as they could possibly be made. Del Monte searched the entire world… importing products made to be fed to what many dog guardians regard as members of their families, because they made the deal to get them made as cheaply as possible. Issues with Chinese-based manufacturers is not a new phenomenon, and Del Monte knew that when they searched for a supplier and made the deal. You get what you pay for, and Del Monte knew what they were paying for, and what they might get when they had their treats made as cheaply as possible. See where I am going? Suing its manufacturer is just a cop out and a stunt.

  8. Puller

    Citizens would have little chance of suing China and as Del Monte was the importer and marketer, I believe Del Monte needs to be held accountable. Suppose humans had died, would Del Monte be able to ‘pass the buck’? Not likely.

  9. Kim Anderson

    I guess I need to know what oversight/quality control they exercise at the manufacturing facilities. If the answer is none, I want to know why not. They are putting their name on the labels and they don’t know what is going into the cans? They DO bear responsibility. At least proportionate to the manufacturer, although, I believe the manufacturer (who knew, or should have know, what was in their ingredients) bears the greatest portion of responsibility.

    1. Kim Anderson

      RETRACT – I see the information now.

      To DelMonte – If you want to reap the profits from slapping your name on a product, then you are going to have to bear the responsibility when it goes pear shaped. People’s pets died. They died from eating YOUR product! Accept responsibility just as readily as you accepted the bloated profits from having “your” product manufactured in a place that the whole world knows has a history of poisoning helpless consumers (babies, dogs, cats . . . . ) in the name of profit. Your product, your profit, your responsibility.

  10. Amy Leonard

    We should hold Del Monte accountable for “laying” down with the Chinese manufacturer. Be able to collect from Del Monte and then if they want to recap any monies the it would be up to them to collect from their supplier. We didn’t “contract” with that supplier by making our purchase of treats from DelMonte it is up to them to make this right and take the “hit” for not doing their due diligence. It’s like signing a contract and then the job is subbed out – my contract is with the company at the top of the invoice. I would sue them if anything was wrong then that co would have to go after the sub contractor for reimbursement.

  11. barbara

    To answer Susan’s question: Being an honest manufacturer I would pick #2, of course. I would plan on flying to China and try to visit the farm(s) where the chickens are raised, inspect the feed, check the slaughter facility and where they make the jerky. [This is a joke, right?] First of all, the Chinese company would not send me to ”the facility”, because it would be, no doubt, 10 to 20 Mom and Pop farms scattered all over the countryside. This is assuming that they haven’t sent me on a wild goose chase to Uncle Chen’s cleaned up and pristine farm in Shanghai. Inspect the feed: would they allow me? No thank you to the slaughter facility, I’ve already lost my lunch today. Do you think that they would allow me inside the jerky facility when they refused the FDA, who went to China and came back home empty-handed with their tail between their legs?

    So, do I decide: Profit or Integrity?

    To answer the main question: I would rather that Del Monte take the blame, rather than passing the buck to the Chinese. Besides, they don’t care one way or the other, and have probably already opened up a “new” facility.

  12. Pacific Sun

    Theorectically you can only sue when there is a violation of a signed specific contract and agreement without escape clauses. Even then what would hold international parties accountable, meaning where does the jurisdiction (enforcement) lie? There are some “no fault” contracts which insure for just these reasons, when an unexpected issue does arise, that the producer won’t be held liable. Oh it’s entirely possible to sue after the fact, it’s just a matter of what the defense will use as its argument. In the case of suing a foreign entity, its possible that the liability responsibily will get backed up the tree endlessly anyway. As in the “distributor” wasn’t aware of the “manufacturer” who wasn’t aware of the “supplier” who wasn’t aware of the ingredient “sellers” who had no idea what the “growers” were doing, who would admit to “intentional, willful” harm anyway … just natural circumentances (ad nauseum). The key for US consumers would be holding the importer of the product accountable, as being the last gatekeeper for safety and oversight. Good luck there, we all saw what happened as parties scattered to the winds during the 2007 Recall. The ultimate sanction will never be to win damages in any lawsuit, but to boycott the product at its source. Refuse to contract with suppliers, stop imports, refise tp retail it – period. With no sales, there is no market. End of problem.

  13. Sandy

    Del Monte imported and sold this product so they should be responsible for making sure it is safe to use. This is even more important since it is coming from a country with a history of poisoning pets and people. If Del Monte sells us poison peaches we should be able to sue them not the Mexican farmer who will likely disappear overnight. They buy cheap products to make a profit!!!
    As consumers it is also partly our responsibility to become informed and only buy quality food and treats from known sources. Is this not why we follow Susan’s advice….

  14. David Welch

    When I buy a product with the name of a major company on the label I am making the purchase because i expect that company to be responsible for what I get. If the package says Del Monte then Del Monte is responsible. If the packages says Ping Lee from China then Ping Lee is responsible. Where they get the ingredients in the package is their responsibility since their name goes on the package. They screw up they are responsible.

Leave a Reply