It has been a tough year for everyone, but no one has had it harder than Subway’s tuna sandwich.
The sandwich franchise has been getting sued left and right, up and down, side to side for a while now, and it just keeps getting worse for them.
A new lawsuit against Subway alleges that not only is the tuna sandwich not made of tuna, but that it actually contains chicken, pork and cattle DNA.
The lawsuit states that they had a marine biologist test 20 tuna samples from 20 Subway restaurants in southern California. The results allegedly showed that there was no tuna detected in 19 of the sandwiches and that all of them actually contained chicken DNA, 11 contained pork DNA and seven contained cattle DNA.
But Subway isn’t going down too easy and said in a statement that they will seek to shut down the “reckless and improper” lawsuit.
The company even clapped back by posting on their website that “Subway tuna is real tuna” and assured the public that their tuna is of the highest quality and wild-caught.
According to them, the complainants keep “changing their story each time” because at first they filled saying that Subway’s sandwich was lacking tuna, but the new one says that it does not contain tuna at all rather other meats.
This isn’t the company’s first instance with the law, last year Ireland’s Supreme Court ruled that Subway’s bread was not real bread (legally) because it contained way too much sugar.