Subway is responding to a lawsuit that accuses the sandwich company of serving fake tuna.
As reported by the Washington Post, last week two California residents — Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin — filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that the “tuna” sold at the company’s chain locations contains no actual tuna and is made with “a mixture of various concoctions.”
In a statement obtained by People on Friday, a spokesperson for the fast food eatery denies the allegations, saying, “There simply is no truth to the allegations in the complaint that was filed in California.”
“Subway delivers 100% cooked tuna to its restaurants, which is mixed with mayonnaise and used in freshly made sandwiches, wraps and salads that are served to and enjoyed by our guests,” the representative explained.
“The taste and quality of our tuna make it one of Subway’s most popular products and these baseless accusations threaten to damage our franchisees, small business owners who work tirelessly to uphold the high standards that Subway sets for all of its products, including its tuna,” the chain added.
“Given the facts, the lawsuit constitutes a reckless and improper attack on Subway’s brand and goodwill, and on the livelihood of its California franchisees. Indeed, there is no basis in law or fact for the plaintiffs’ claims, which are frivolous and are being pursued without adequate investigation.”
“Unfortunately, this lawsuit is part of a trend in which the named plaintiffs’ attorneys have been targeting the food industry in an effort to make a name for themselves in that space. Subway will vigorously defend itself against these and any other baseless efforts to mischaracterize and tarnish the high-quality products that Subway and its franchisees provide to their customers, in California and around the world, and intends to fight these claims through all available avenues if they are not immediately dismissed.”
Per the lawsuit, samples of tuna were collected at Subway locations across California and were tested at independent labs. There, it is alleged that the samples contain “a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna, yet have been blended together by defendants to imitate the appearance of tuna.”
However, the Post noted that an attorney for one of the plaintiffs, Shalini Dogra, declined to reveal each alleged concoction.
Alleging that they were “tricked into buying food items that wholly lacked the ingredients they reasonably thought they were purchasing,” the two plaintiffs are suing for fraud, intentional misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment.
Dhanowa and Amin also allege that Subway is “saving substantial sums of money in manufacturing the products because the fabricated ingredient they use in the place of tuna costs less money.”
“Consumers are consistently misled into purchasing the products for the commonly known and/or advertised benefits and characteristics of tuna when in fact no such benefits could be had, given that the products are in fact devoid of tuna,” the complaint alleged.