A B.C. woman who had a bad experience with a popular dollar store chain initiated a legal fight in hopes of damages.
A dispute that came to the BC Civil Resolution Tribunal reveals exactly what happened after the B.C. resident bought a bird seed bell from a Dollarama location.
The applicant said that her dog ate some of the bird seed and became ill, and asked for $3,400 in damages.
In response, the dollar store chain said that it met the applicable safety standards and labelling requirements and added that the bell was designed for birds. It asked the tribunal to dismiss the claim.
According to the facts of the dispute laid out in the decision posted online, the applicant bought a PetStore Wild Bird Bell from a Dollarama in B.C. on Nov. 18, 2024.
She claimed that she hung the bell in a tree, and that when the birds pecked at it, some of the pieces broke off and fell to the ground.
Her poor pup, Angus, ate the bird seed she bought from the B.C. dollar store.
According to vet records from Nov. 26, 2024, Angus was brought in after vomiting bird seed. She told the vet he “was known to ingest a variety of things” and he got into a “puck” of bird seed.
“The veterinarian diagnosed gastroenteritis, with a concern for pancreatitis and potential GI obstruction. Angus was kept for care overnight and released the next day. The veterinary invoice was $3,443.41,” the decision states.
The applicant claims that there was no warning on the package about a danger to pets, and the tribunal agreed that it never warned that it was unsafe for dogs.
To win damages, she had to prove that Dollarama was negligent, and the tribunal said that the retailer owes its customers a duty of care.
However, it added that “retailers are not required to open and inspect goods sold to them already packaged.”
It said that there’s no indication that Dollarama manufactured the bird bell.
Because, according to the tribunal, Dollarama didn’t know that the bird seed would make the dog ill, it didn’t breach the standard of care and therefore was not negligent.
The claim was dismissed.
Do you agree with the tribunal’s ruling?