Kings College London student Saima Ahmad claimed Nestlé broke its duty of care to consumers and threatened legal action against it.
Ahmad has demanded a written apology from Nestlé bosses, a full refund for the £2 product she purchased and a lifetime supply of Kit Kat so she can act as “quality control” for the manufacturer.
Writing to the manufacturer, she complained: “The truth of the matter is; manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers.
“The specific duty you owe in consistency in your manufacturing process. The failure to take due care in the manufacturing process resulted in a product being defective.
Monetary and emotional loss
“As a result I feel as though I have been misled to part with my money and purchase a product that is clearly different from what has been marketed by Nestlé. The loss I have suffered is of monetary and emotional significance.”
Ahmed added that she would take legal action against Nestlé if it did not comply with her demands.
Nestlé manufacturing defected Kit Kats – missing the wafer – was a widespread problem, Ahmed claimed.
A spokeswoman for Nestlé told FoodManufacture.co.uk: “If a consumer finds any issue with a Nestlé product we would encourage them to get in touch with us online, by phone or by post so that we can investigate and put things right for them.”
Nestlé launched its Kit Kat brand in the 1930s and it has grown to become Britain’s number one biscuit, it claimed.
Last year, Nestlé angered many of its loyal consumers after it changed the name of the chocolate bar to You Tube Break as part of a its partnership with Google.
Many readers of this website told us they would stop buying the product as a result of the temporary name change.
Last week, the High Court ruled against Nestlé in a dispute with Cadbury over its attempt to trademark its four-finger Kit Kat product.
Law firm Roythornes said the ruling demonstrated how vital it was to protect all elements of a company’s intellectual property.