A Cease and Desist From Wonka Corp to Mr Charlie Bucket

The Offices of Folkestone, Folkestone and Grasby

ATT: Sarah Grattan, solicitor

Dear Ms Grattan,

I refer to your letter of the 18th, in which you asked on behalf of your client, I quote, “When can he move in?” and “Where’s the chocolate?”

I regret to inform you that my answer, as the representative of Mr William Wonka, will on this occasion be the same as that which was communicated to you on the previous six occasions on which you posed these or similar queries. No, there will be no chocolate forthcoming, and no, your client will not be taking up residence at the factory, nor taking ownership upon my client’s death (which, I may add, your client seems to believe is far more imminent than my client’s latest physical would suggest).

I draw your attention once more to the fine print of the contract that your client, along with all the Golden Ticket recipients, signed at the beginning of the tour. Perhaps Mr Bucket chose not to read this contract in full, but that was his mistake, and the fact that a person known as “Grandpa Joe” gave him poor legal advice is not something my client is responsible for. The conditions set out in that fine print quite clearly state that any participant in the tour who damages company equipment, disobeys clear orders from the CEO Mr Wonka, or in any way violates health and safety rules as clearly communicated by factory staff, will have their entitlement to the “grand prize” of a lifetime supply of chocolate automatically nullified.

Indeed, I understand that my client made this very point to your client at the conclusion of the tour, when your client had what I consider to be the quite surprising gall, despite his knowledge of his violation of the contract, to request aforementioned chocolate. Mr Wonka was very clear to Mr Bucket and Mr Joe that, having stolen a valuable experimental beverage from the Wonka Corporation, and caused contamination to a sterile production environment, putting at risk many Loompa-hours of research and development and jeopardising the schedule of our new product rollout, Mr Bucket would be receiving nothing at all, in accordance with the signed contract.

I understand that Mr Bucket then attempted to bribe Mr Wonka into reversing his decision with the gift of an “Everlasting Gobstopper”, apparently in the belief that a wealthy and experienced businessman such as Mr Wonka can be swayed from sound business practice by the receipt of small balls covered in a child’s saliva. Needless to say Mr Bucket was mistaken in this.

Your claim that, following the information regarding the nullification of his prize, Mr Wonka then informed Mr Bucket that he was “only testing him” and that in fact he HAD won, we can dismiss fairly quickly. Clearly something said in the course of casual banter cannot override a written contract that was signed by both parties in good faith, and whatever conversations Mr Wonka and Mr Bucket had will in no way be considered a new agreement.

Furthermore, it is, we believe, disingenuous of Mr Bucket to claim, after experiencing the factory tour, that he had no knowledge of Mr Wonka’s mental health issues. It is attested by several witnesses that Mr Bucket had heard Mr Wonka use the phrase “Strike that – reverse it”, and was fully aware that he was prone to accidentally saying the opposite of what he meant. Witnesses also attest that the journey of the canal boat “Wonkatania” along the chocolate river was adequate evidence to any reasonable person that Mr Wonka is in no fit state to be making any binding personal promises. Indeed, a recording of this boat ride is to be submitted as evidence for the defence in an upcoming wrongful death case and we believe it will be decisive in our favour.

As to your client’s claim that Mr Wonka “took him up in the great glass elevator and promised him he could have the factory”, it is with more sorrow than anger that I feel the need to again point out to you, a legal professional, that the decision as to the ultimate stewardship of the company is one for the shareholders and board of directors of Wonka Corp. As you are aware, Mr Willy Wonka has not held a majority share in the company for well over thirty years now, and even were one to take his wild promises to a young boy seriously – and no reasonable person, I am confident, would – he is in no position to “give” the factory to anyone.

As to your client’s frankly offensive suggestion that he would also gain “custody” of the factory’s workforce, whose racial demographics seem to have convinced Mr Bucket and his “Grandpa” that it is legal for a white person to own them, I will pass over it without further comment, as I am sure it was a case of misspeaking and I have no wish to cause your client any public embarrassment due to his political views, which are after all those of a prepubescent boy with an only partially-formed brain.

I will conclude by requesting that you cease and desist from further efforts to extort cash, shares or confectionery from my client. If this request is ignored, your client can expect prosecution for theft, criminal damage, racial vilification and defamation. Other charges may be forthcoming.

Yours faithfully,

Edward Folkestone, Attorney-at-law