SINGAPORE: A dispute over a plate of Thai-style fried kway teow has escalated into a legal standoff, after a diner claimed he bit into a small stone while eating the dish and sought about S$7,500 in compensation, a case that highlights the fine line between consumer protection and evidentiary standards in food-related claims.
According to Lianhe Zaobao and Shin Min Daily News, the incident involved a 25-year-old diner, identified as Mr Shen, who said he purchased Thai fried kway teow from a stall at Sengkang Square on Sep 22 last year at around 7 p.m. He claimed that while eating the takeaway meal, he bit into a stone measuring about 0.5 cm in diameter, resulting in suspected cracks to his front tooth and injuries to his mouth.
The stallholder told Shin Min Daily News that the diner contacted him via text message after the incident to say he had found a stone in the food. The stallholder said he requested to meet the diner in person to understand the situation but was repeatedly turned down.
The diner kept refusing, saying he was unwell, the stallholder said.
After checking his operations and finding no apparent issues, the stallholder decided to refer the matter to the Singapore Food Agency (SFA). Officers later inspected the stall and found no food safety lapses involving foreign objects, according to the agency.
Despite this, the diner continued to seek compensation. The stallholder said the matter was eventually brought before the Small Claims Tribunals on Nov 4 last year, where the diner sought about S$7,500, including more than S$5,000 for dental treatment.
According to the stallholder, the diner did not go to see a dentist or a doctor. These figures were all found online, adding that he found the claim unreasonable and inconsistent. He declined to agree to the amount, though the judge later suggested that both parties attempt an out-of-court settlement.
The stallholder said the dispute did not end there. In December, the diner allegedly sent another email demanding more than S$7,000 in compensation and warning of legal action if there was no response within a week.
The stallholder said that he has been worrying about this for months and is concerned it could affect our business.
Mr Shen declined to meet with Shin Min Daily News in person but explained in an email that he did not seek dental treatment due to financial constraints. He added that the compensation amount was an estimate based on online research.
In response to media queries, the Singapore Food Agency confirmed that its inspection found no food safety breaches.
A SFA spokesperson said they did not find any food safety lapses involving foreign objects in food, adding that stallholders were reminded to ensure food is safe from such foreign matter.
While food contamination cases can raise public concern, such disputes also reflect a bigger challenge facing both consumers and food operators in assessing claims when evidence is limited.
For hawkers and stallholders operating on thin margins, unresolved allegations can carry permanent consequences, regardless of the final outcome.
