Recently, a post about live ants found inside Tims bagel packaging has sparked widespread discussion on social media. A consumer bought two bagels through a food delivery platform, and upon opening the packaging, discovered ants crawling inside the bag, with some even embedded in the cream filling. Although the store issued a refund, it refused the consumer's demand for triple or tenfold compensation. Netizens are divided over questions such as where the ants came from and whether there were hidden risks in the packaging method. The incident has been reported to the 12315 platform, and the consumer's path to defending their rights continues. [more…]

Recently, a consumer posted a video on social media claiming to have found black thread in a black garlic and meat floss sandwich biscuit purchased from Sexy Tea, sparking widespread attention. The video shows black threads resembling sewing thread mixed into the biscuit's filling layer, connecting the broken pieces together. After the poster reported the issue to customer service, the brand required the problematic biscuit to be mailed back before compensation would be provided—a solution that drew opposition from many netizens who worried about the loss of evidence. Previously, other consumers had reported finding foreign objects such as hair, insects, and even screws in Sexy Tea snacks, with after-sales handling mostly involving mailing back the product in exchange for gift packages or coupons, rarely providing financial compensation as required by regulations. As the incident continues to escalate, discussions about the reasonableness of merchants demanding the return of evidence and the protection of consumer rights are intensifying. [more…]

Recently, an employee at a Heytea store in Shijiazhuang searched for a customer's phone number and added her on WeChat to harass her, sparking widespread attention. After the incident came to light, Heytea quickly fired the employee and apologized and compensated the affected customer. This individual case not only exposes the lack of customer privacy protection training at tea beverage brands, but also once again brings the topic of consumer personal information security to the forefront. With the Regulations on the Implementation of the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests officially taking effect in July 2024, the boundaries for business operators collecting and using personal information have become clearer, and the cost of violations has risen significantly. This article will review the course of the incident, the brand's response, and the relevant legal provisions. [more…]

Recently, a Xinyang netizen exposed that a drink purchased at a Luckin Coffee store on campus had a fly settled at the bottom, sparking widespread attention. The consumer refused the store's initial offer of a free drink and a complimentary beverage, demanding compensation in accordance with the law. Luckin's after-sales service called multiple times, offering coupons, and was even accused of implying that the consumer had put the foreign object in themselves. In the end, the employee involved was fired, and the consumer received 500 yuan in compensation. This is not the first time Luckin has been embroiled in a food safety scandal; there have previously been incidents involving foreign objects such as work badges and ants. At a time when competition in the tea beverage market is white-hot, a brand's sincerity in handling problems has become key to consumer trust. This article reviews the course of the incident and the legal basis, and includes related recommendations from Front Street Coffee. [more…]

Recently, a video about finding an employee badge in a Luckin Coffee drink has drawn attention on social media. According to a netizen's post, while drinking a Luckin cold beverage, they discovered an employee badge with a staff name printed on it at the bottom of the cup. After media verification, the store involved admitted that an employee had indeed lost a badge, speculating that a loose pin caused it to fall into the drink. At the same time, posts on social media about foreign objects such as flying insects, raw material packaging boxes, and equipment parts appearing in Luckin drinks are not uncommon, and stores mostly compensate consumers with refunds plus coupons, triggering some customers' doubts about the brand's attitude in handling such matters. Some consumers have shared their experiences of defending their rights, ultimately reaching a satisfactory solution through negotiation. This series of incidents has once again pushed the food safety and after-sales handling of chain coffee brands into the focus of public opinion. [more…]

Recently, a customer found a screw sunk at the bottom of an Iced Orange Americano purchased at a Manner store, and the incident quickly spread on social media. According to Manner employees, the screw was suspected to have come from the ice guard plate of the store's ice machine, possibly falling into the ice storage bin because it was not tightened during assembly, and eventually ending up in the drink. After the incident, the brand required all stores to check the screws on their ice machines and report with photos, while the employee involved may face dismissal and a heavy fine. Online opinion was divided over whether the consumer should complain and seek compensation: some sympathized with the worker and suggested settling privately, while others insisted that mistakes must be held accountable and that the consumer's rights protection is reasonable and lawful. As of press time, the compensation plan remains unclear, but the incident has already triggered widespread discussion about equipment management and employee responsibility at coffee shops. [more…]

After the widespread adoption of mobile payments, ordering by scanning a QR code has become standard in bubble tea shops and restaurants. But have you ever noticed that many ordering mini-programs require you to authorize your mobile phone number or even more personal information before use? In October of this year, the Market Supervision Administration of Putuo District, Shanghai, investigated and dealt with a case involving a catering company illegally collecting consumer information, which sparked widespread attention. The restaurant guided customers to order by scanning a QR code on the table, but forcibly required authorization of their mobile phone numbers, and did not inform them of the purpose of use. Moreover, the backend allowed arbitrary access to and download of member data such as names, genders, mobile phone numbers, and card balances. Ultimately, the company was warned and fined 50,000 yuan. With the official implementation of the Personal Information Protection Law, penalties for such acts will be significantly increased, and consumers' privacy rights deserve more attention. [more…]

The extraction time for a cup of Americano actually escalated to the 12315 complaint platform? Recently, a netizen ordered an Americano at a coffee shop in Shenzhen and believed that the barista's extraction time exceeded 90 seconds, far beyond the 40-second standard in their understanding, so they demanded a refund and complained to 12315, also requesting that the merchant remove the product from sale. This incident sparked heated discussion in the coffee community: Is there any hard-and-fast rule for the extraction time of espresso? Is it reasonable for consumers to complain about a shop based on their personal standards? This article will recount the incident, sort out the industry reference range for espresso extraction time, and explore the boundary between consumer rights protection and product standards. [more…]

For professional coffee knowledge exchange and more coffee bean information, please follow Coffee Workshop (WeChat public account: cafe_style); for more specialty coffee beans, please add the personal WeChat of Front Street Coffee (FrontStreet Coffee), WeChat ID: qjcoffeex. Recently, the case in which Saturnbird, over the course of 20 months, sued "Qicai Zhi Mi" for unauthorized use of a similar small-cup instant coffee appearance reached a result. The Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court found that unfair competition was constituted, awarded 1.73 million yuan in damages, and ordered the production and sale of the infringing products to stop. Saturnbird became famous for its super-instant coffee and mini coffee cup design, and its packaging sparked a DIY craze and swept social media, which is why it has frequently been imitated and even copied. In this case, "Qicai Zhi Mi" not only had highly similar style, packaging, and promotional images, but also used the search term "Saturnbird same style" to mislead consumers. The case lasted nearly two years, highlighting the current reality in the food industry that intellectual property rights protection is difficult and the boundary between reference and copying is blurred. The article combines cases such as Sexy Tea suing Chayan Guanse to explore how original brands can protect their rights and interests through copyright, patent rights, exclusive trademark rights, and the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. [more…]

It is no longer news that chain coffee brands sell merchandise. Products such as cups, pins, and canvas bags can not only increase revenue but also cultivate fan loyalty. However, once merchandise has quality problems, after-sales disputes follow one after another. Recently, a netizen posted that the bottom of the inner liner of a stainless steel insulated cup they bought from Starbucks had black rust spots, and when they asked the official side for a replacement, they were refused on the grounds that it was "beyond the after-sales time limit." The post resonated with a large number of consumers. Some complained that quality control was worrying, while others believed that the way it was used might be the key. Three days after the incident gained traction, the blogger updated the progress, saying that Starbucks had agreed to replace it. Who is actually responsible in this dispute? And how should brands balance the appearance and quality of merchandise? [more…]

Recently, a consumer in Jiangsu discovered that the milk tea they purchased from Chahuanong contained only half a cup. After giving feedback to the merchant, not only was the issue not properly resolved, but they also reportedly experienced SMS bombing and harassment from internet trolls. After the incident garnered widespread attention, Chahuanong officially issued two statements on July 28, first apologizing and then denying hiring trolls, stating that the police have intervened in the investigation. However, netizens in the comments section generally disapproved of the brand's handling, believing that the store was shortchanging customers in the first place and is suspected of leaking customer information, and a mere "full cooperation" is hard to satisfy the public. As coffee enthusiasts, we also focus on issues related to production standards in the beverage industry and consumer rights protection, and Front Street will continue to monitor the progress of the situation. [more…]

A super value 5-time card launched on Luckin Coffee's Tmall flagship store quickly triggered a buying frenzy because it was priced as low as 13.77 yuan for any 5 cups chosen from 15 classic drinks. However, in the early hours of the next day, many consumers had their orders forcibly refunded by the platform on the grounds of "no longer wanted" without any refund operation on their part, and some, although shown as shipped, did not receive the electronic vouchers. Luckin later explained that a system configuration error had triggered automatic refunds and offered a 32-yuan drink voucher as compensation. But some consumers were not convinced, believing that the brand's unilateral cancellation of the contract amounted to a breach of contract or even fraud, and have filed lawsuits in court demanding reasonable compensation. The incident exposed the performance risks in the sale of electronic discount vouchers and the issue of consumer rights protection. [more…]

Recently, a Nayuki store in Linping District, Hangzhou, was exposed after a consumer allegedly found a thumbnail-sized blue-black stone in a drink, and when the consumer sought compensation, the store manager instead accused them of extortion and fraud. After the customer called the police and reviewed the mall’s surveillance footage, the video fully recorded the entire process of picking up the order, drinking it, and spitting out the stone, but the store did not provide surveillance of the production process. Nayuki’s official customer service refused media interviews, and the phone service at the store involved was suspended. The incident has drawn attention to food safety and the protection of consumer rights by catering brands. [more…]

Recently, a consumer purchased coffee at a Luckin Coffee physical store and also bought a pack of daily mixed nuts on impulse. Upon eating them, the customer noticed an abnormal taste and, after checking the expiration date, confirmed that the product was expired. The customer immediately provided feedback through customer service channels and posted on social media to remind other consumers to be aware. Luckin responded quickly, requiring stores nationwide to self-inspect the shelf life of nut products. According to internal staff, all employees at the store involved were fired. The incident sparked widespread discussion online, with some praising Luckin's decisive handling and others considering the punishment too severe. Subsequently, Luckin compensated the customer 1,000 yuan in accordance with the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests, and requested the deletion of the post, which was refused. Front Street Coffee continues to follow developments in the coffee industry and food safety issues. [more…]

Luckin Coffee experienced abnormally low-priced orders on the Ele.me platform due to an operational configuration error. After a large number of users rushed to place orders, Luckin handled the situation by unilaterally canceling orders and temporarily suspending online operations. This move sparked strong dissatisfaction among consumers and also drew attention from the legal community: lawyers on one side argued that canceling paid orders was suspected of infringing on consumer rights; the other side pointed out that if it was a major misunderstanding, the contract could be revoked in accordance with the law. If there was intentional malicious marketing, it could also constitute fraud. In the end, Luckin promised to bear all losses and issue compensatory vouchers. This article sorts out the course of the incident, netizen feedback, and lawyers' views, so that coffee lovers can understand the full picture of this controversy. [more…]

Recently, a consumer exposed on social media that a drink purchased from a Luckin Coffee store at a school was found with dozens of ants floating in it, sparking widespread attention. The store explained that sugar-loving ants might have crawled through the pipes into the syrup bottle, and since this order happened to be the first cup of the day, the staff failed to notice in time. Although the store has apologized and promised thorough disinfection and replacement of the syrup, and Luckin's customer service also offered five coupons as compensation, the consumer was not satisfied and has called 12315 to file a complaint, awaiting further official handling. The incident not only raised doubts among netizens about Luckin's food safety controls but also triggered heated discussion about compensation standards. [more…]

Recently, a female consumer in Hefei, Anhui Province, found a cockroach at the bottom of a cup after buying milk tea through a food delivery platform. Even more shockingly, after she exposed the incident on Weibo, she received threatening private messages from an anonymous person. The incident quickly escalated and became a trending topic on Weibo, with 84.574 million views. An investigation found that the shop involved was not the authentic "COCO都可" but a counterfeit store called "与COCO茶饮". The merchant initially refused compensation and accused the consumer of extortion, but later expressed willingness to apologize, compensate, and fire the store manager. This incident not only exposed the difficulty of identifying counterfeit brands on food delivery platforms but also once again sounded the alarm for food safety. Front Street Coffee reminds you that when encountering similar problems, you must preserve evidence at the first opportunity and defend your rights in accordance with the law. [more…]

Recently, a video of a conflict between a Starbucks employee and a customer has drawn attention on social media. In the video, the employee, who refused to sell cold brew concentrate—a semi-finished ingredient—on its own, was fiercely insulted by the customer and nearly came under physical attack. After the incident came to light, netizens expressed sympathy for the employee and discussed topics such as how the brand handles customer complaints and how employee rights are protected. Many current employees also shared similar experiences, pointing out that the company often smooths things over by issuing coupons, which may encourage malicious complaints and leave frontline staff disheartened. [more…]

Recently, a consumer in Hangzhou, Zhejiang, posted on social media claiming to have疑似 found fragments of an insect carcass in a takeaway milk tea from the well-known freshly made tea drink brand KOI. The consumer and the brand failed to reach an agreement after multiple communications over compensation and an apology, and the consumer has filed a complaint with 12315 and insists on pursuing legal proceedings. KOI responded that neither the store surveillance nor inspections by the market supervision department found any foreign object entering the drink, and that the strainer hole design of the shaker cup would also block such foreign objects, so it does not accept an apology on the platform but is willing to compensate in accordance with the law. The incident has attracted widespread attention, with both sides sticking to their own accounts, and there is currently no new progress. [more…]

The trademark dispute in the tea beverage industry is once again making waves. Previously, Coffee Workshop reported that "Cha Yan Guan Se" lost its trademark infringement lawsuit against "Cha Yan Yue Se," and "Cha Yan Yue Se" won its counterclaim against "Cha Yan Guan Se." Now another one has emerged: "Cha Yan Yue Se." This trademark, applied for registration in 2018, was declared invalid by the National Intellectual Property Administration because it was highly similar to the genuine Cha Yan Yue Se in terms of text composition, pronunciation, and graphic design. The registrant, a certain Guo, refused to accept the ruling and actually sued the CNIPA in court, but was ultimately rejected by the Beijing Intellectual Property Court. From "Cha Yan Guan Se" to "Cha Yan Yue Se," imitators keep emerging one after another. This farce once again reminds us: trademark protection is by no means child's play. Although the road to brand rights protection is long, the law will ultimately provide a fair answer. [more…]