Is product substitution a form of food fraud?
Is product substitution a form food fraud?
Is product substitution a form food fraud?
Can be.
What are the considerations in product substitution?
Hello joyjael,
Substitution is a form of fraud. But if you declare to your buyer that instead of this specie/variety X, you use specie Y due to lack of source/supply it can no longer be fraudulent. But, without the knowledge of consumer/buyer substitution is considered food fraud.
regards,
redfox
If the substitution results in the customer or consumer being mislead or deceived then yes it is food fraud.
Is it still fraud if the result is found to be superior to the customer's original expectation, even though not informed ?
Sort of economic gain by both parties.
Is it still fraud if the result is found to be superior to the customer's original expectation, even though not informed ?
Sort of economic gain by both parties.
I think that's a bonus. I can think of chemical manufacturers that charge differently for FCC materials vs non-food grade, but may in fact only have one SKU at the higher standard.
Similarly paying for traceable calibrations on equipment with certificates, odds on that most of the equipment is calibrated to the same standard but you pay for the certificate. Wouldn't consider that fraud.
Charles, that would depend on the customer.....if you make a store brand olive oil (for example) and the budget brand is 50/50 olive/canola, and suddenly you want to sub only olive (canola had a pest wipe it out) that customer may be concerned that their customer will revolt when you return to original formula.....
Charles, that would depend on the customer.....if you make a store brand olive oil (for example) and the budget brand is 50/50 olive/canola, and suddenly you want to sub only olive (canola had a pest wipe it out) that customer may be concerned that their customer will revolt when you return to original formula.....
Hi Scampi,
Indeed, yr example is sort of what i was thinking about. IMEX it happens - less profit is preferred to no Production.
I also agree that further business could be impacted. But not intentionally.
Perhaps it's "Reverse Fraud".
I don't see it as a fraudulent act if the substitution of one material outside the recipe is communicated to the customer prior to production.
I don't see it as a fraudulent act if the substitution of one material outside the recipe is communicated to the customer prior to production.
Perhaps it should have received official approval.
A lot of this will depend on if there is an economic gain involved at the end when the product is sold/created. Food fraud deals with the change of ingredients without reporting them with the intent of economic gain. Of course you can argue that there was no intent but if your books are pulled and it can be proven that you saved money by changing the ingredient, and you never informed your customers, then you are subject to the law. Here is a report on food fraud that was prepared for Congress and remember that it is not what you say it is what you can prove.
R43358.pdf 712.29KB 22 downloads
Cheers!
If you change components, as long as the product development process is documented and the change is declared (not brand change), then its perfectly legal.
if its just a change in brand, it will still reflect in PD records and a revision in the suppliers list and inventory, still legal.
undeclared changes without any documentation is problematic