Tag: lawsuit

L’Oreal Class Action Lawsuit: Shampoo Doesn’t Contain Keratin

~ Joseph Kellner

A L’Oreal class action lawsuit claims that the beauty giant’s shampoo and conditioner deceive customers into thinking they contain keratin.

According to plaintiff Tammy DeVane, the L’Oreal Paris EverSleek Sulfate Free Keratin Caring products are labeled, named, and advertised to trick reasonable customers.

The L’Oreal shampoo class action lawsuit claims that based on label representations, customers assume that the products contain keratin. However, the hair-nourishing ingredient is allegedly not present in the shampoo and conditioner. “Saying the products are ‘Keratin Caring’ when they contain no keratin, and repeating that representation with additional statements on the product labels and in a uniform advertising campaign, is unlawful,” DeVane claims. “Defendant’s mis-branding is intentional and renders the products less valuable, or even worthless.”

Keratin is a protein that naturally occurs in the hair, skin, and nails. The protein protects these parts of the body from damage and stress, creating a healthy, attractive appearance. Keratin is often used in hair care products due to its nourishing nature and many consumers look for keratin when purchasing shampoo and conditioner. L’Oreal allegedly takes advantage of the keratin reputation through marketing and advertising their “Keratin Caring” line in a deceptive way.

Product descriptions reportedly state that the Keratin Caring shampoo and conditioner “[care] for the essential protein and keratin that is found in hair.” These representations about the products’ keratin benefits are reportedly reflected in websites, promotional materials, and commercials. DeVane argues that L’Oreal heavily represents their products as containing keratin and that consumers trust the company’s advertisements. This reportedly results in consumers purchasing L’Oreal Keratin Caring shampoo and conditioner based on the belief that they contain keratin.

However, the L’Oreal class action states that because the products do not contain keratin, consumer purchases are proven to be worthless. DeVane claims that she and other customers would not have purchased the products if they had known that they didn’t contain keratin or would have paid less for the hair care products. “The absence of keratin and the failure of the EverSleek Keratin Caring Products to provide the claimed benefits of keratin leave no reason to purchase these products at all, since other proven and less­-expensive products exist,” the L’Oreal class action lawsuit states.

DeVane seeks to represent a Class of consumers who purchased L’Oreal EverSleek Keratin Care shampoo and conditioner. She also seeks to represent two sub classes of consumers from New York and Florida, respectively, who purchased EverSleek Keratin Care shampoo and conditioner. The L’Oreal class action lawsuit seeks actual damages, statutory damages, restitution, disgorgement, interest, court costs, and attorneys’ fees. DeVane and the proposed Class are represented by Taylor Bartlett and Caroline Hollingsworth of Heninger Garrison Davis LLC.

The L’Oreal Paris EverSleek Sulfate Free Keratin Caring Shampoo and Conditioner Class Action Lawsuit is DeVane v. L’Oreal USA Inc., Case No. 1:19­-cv­-04362, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Employee Lawsuit brought against Sephora for unpaid wages

~ Joseph Kellner

Sephora is at the centre of an Employee Lawsuit after workers accused the retailer of failing to adequately compensate them for time spent going through security and applying make-up before a shift.

The lawsuit was brought against it in the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, with a team of attorneys representing around 8,000 Sephora workers. The employees are asking the judge to grant class certification for the wage-and-hour lawsuit, according to a report by Top Class Actions.

However, despite Judge Karnow raising concerns that lack of solid evidence of the unpaid time spent in work could lead to liability issues, attorneys on the Sephora employee lawsuit countered that this lack of time logging was due to Sephora, which had a ‘duty to track’.

An attorney allegedly stated, “As far as liability goes, a lot of the claims involve time. You can’t allow an employer to avoid paying employees by virtue of the fact it didn’t track its time. That means an employee cannot prove his or her damages. If they had tracked time, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.”

Sephora workers were said to have provided evidence that they are expected to wear and maintain their make up as part of their duties, while the lawsuit also alleged the retailer failed to provide ample rest and meal breaks.

The beauty retailer is said to have started compensating workers an extra three minutes for security bag checks, a move that attorneys argue is an acknowledgement by Sephora that it had been failing to do this previously.

Is Ulta Repackaging and Reselling Used Makeup to Consumers? A New Lawsuit Says Yes

~ Joseph Kellner

A new lawsuit filed in Chicago last week alleges that beauty giant Ulta has been repackaging and reselling used makeup to its unsuspecting customers for years.

Attorney Zimmerman represents Meghan Devries, a Chicago woman who works in the beauty industry. She became suspicious about some of the products she purchased from Ulta.  A woman claiming to be a former Ulta employee first brought the allegations to light in early January. Posting under the Twitter handle @fatinamxo, she wrote that whenever a customer returned a product, employees were instructed by Ulta to repackage or reseal the item and put it back on the shelf for sale. This practice, she said, included everything from makeup to hair and skin-care products, fragrances and hair styling tools.

She said that makeup palettes, for example, were cleaned up so that they looked new and returned to the shelf for reselling, unsanitized. She then shared screenshots of other Ulta employees making the same claims. Those tweets were cited in the class action complaint (pdf) Zimmerman filed in Cook County, Ill., last week. The suit also cites the claims of former employees that Ulta has a limit on how many returned items can be thrown away. “Managers will take used products out of a damaged bin, and if they look good enough to resell, they’ll put them back on the shelves and resell them so they don’t exceed their quota,” Zimmerman told ABC7.

He said that some of the products purchased from an Ulta store on North Michigan Avenue in Chicago seemed to have been previously used, including eye shadows missing a brush and face cleansers that were already open. Those products, he said, could have pathogens on them that remain for weeks. “There is E. coli and Klebsiella bacteria, which is commonly found in intestine and expelled with fecal matter,” Zimmerman said.  Zimmerman told ABC7 that the goal of his lawsuit is to change the alleged company practice that limits the number of items that can be thrown away, as well as to provide compensation for customers who may have bought used products.

Think Real Good Before Using These Cosmetic Products

~ Joseph Kellner

Keratin Hair Products

What are they? Keratin is the protein from which hair is made. Many shampoos and conditioners claim to include keratin and promote the protein’s restorative qualities. The products’ labels say they can repair damage caused by over-processing.  Why should you think twice? Most hair products that advertise the benefits of keratin don’t actually contain it or even specifically target the protein. To make matters worse, there is no evidence that keratin additives benefit hair health or growth.  As a result, ClassAction.com has filed a false advertising lawsuit against Matrix and L’Oreal, claiming their products do not contain keratin and therefore are unable to provide the benefits they advertise. If you have purchased keratin hair products made by these companies, contact us today to find out if you are owed money.

Hair-Smoothing Products with Formaldehyde

What are they? Hair-smoothing products are meant to control frizz and curls for an extended period of time; they often contain formaldehyde. The application process is usually done in a professional salon and requires heat from a flat-iron or blow dryer.  Why should you think twice?  When formaldehyde and related ingredients such as methylene glycol are heated, formaldehyde gas is released into the air, which can be hazardous to your health. The FDA and The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have issued warnings about Brazilian Blowout Acai Professional Smoothing Solution and Brasil Cacau Cadiveu, citing safety and labeling violations.  Exposure to formaldehyde can cause health problems such as headaches, dizziness, nausea, chest pain, respiratory-tract problems, eye irritation, rash, and more. The labeling violation letters allege that the product labels do not warn people of these potential harmful effects.  The FDA recommends avoiding products that contain formaldehyde, formalin, or methylene glycol, and to report any adverse reactions.

 

“Natural” Products that Contain Synthetic Ingredients

What are they? Due to increasing consumer demand, many brands are starting to create more “natural” products and trying to stay away from using synthetic and artificial ingredients.  Why should you think twice?  In recent years, certain brands have come under fire for labeling products as “natural” when in fact they contain synthetic and chemical ingredients. In 2016, Unilever settled a class action suit levied against its TRESemmé Naturals product line for $3.25 million and discontinued the line.  Another class action suit was filed in February 2017 against Procter & Gamble’s Herbal Essences Wild Naturals line for misleading labels and false advertising.  If you purchased a Babyganics, keratin, or other hair product and think you fell victim to false advertising, contact us for a free legal consultation. You could be eligible for a class action lawsuit.

 

WEN® by Chaz Dean

What is it? Founded by celebrity hair stylist Chaz Dean, WEN® is a line of sulfate-free hair care products. The WEN Cleansing Conditioner promises to clean, nourish, moisturize, detangle, and strengthen hair, all in one product and without the use of harsh sulfates. WEN’s website says it has sold over 40 million products since 2008.  Why should you think twice? In 2015, more than 200 women joined a class action lawsuit claiming that use of the WEN Cleansing Conditioner led to extreme hair loss, hair breakage, scalp irritation, and rash.  The lawsuit also alleged that WEN misled customers with deceptive marketing, and that the company blocked or removed negative comments and reviews from its website and social media pages.  WEN settled that lawsuit for more than $26 million. The FDA is currently investigating the cleansing conditioner and warns consumers to stop using the product if they experience any adverse reactions.

 

Babyganics

What is it? Babyganics is a Westbury, New York-based company that claims to sell baby-safe, organic household and childcare products (shampoos, lotions, wipes, detergents, etc.). It has grown rapidly over the past 15 years, generating $30 million in revenue in 2013 and securing a sale by SC Johnson in 2016.  Why should you think twice? Many parents allege that Babyganics products are not as organic or kid-friendly as they appear.  As a result, multiples lawsuits have been filed against Babyganics in recent years.  A class action suit filed by ClassAction.com alleges that Babyganics misled consumers through labeling that claimed certain bath products were “tear-free,” gentle, non-allergenic, and safe for infants—when in fact they contain substances that are eye irritants. Another class action lawsuit filed in September 2016 alleges that products labeled as “organic” or “mineral-free” actually contain ingredients that are neither.  One mother also claimed that Babyganics baby wipes caused her five-week-old baby to break out with a bumpy rash on his face.  PrMost serious of all, Theresa Jones alleges that Babyganics’ tear-free shampoo burned her son Hunter’s eyes, potentially causing serious and permanent damage.

Help for Those Who Suffered Chemical Burns, Allergic Reactions After Using ‘Just For Men’

~ Joseph Kellner

Just-For-Men-Chemical-Burns

Contact Parker Waichman LLP today if you experience any of these symptoms after using Just For Men:

Swelling
Burning Sensation
Severe Itching
Blistering
Skin Rash
Weeping Sores
Scarring

Chemical Burns, Swelling, Itching

Even though Just For Men has been on the shelves since 1987, there have been a number of recent reports that the dye caused blisters, itching and chemical burns. Consumer Affairs highlights these painful experiences, citing one user who needed emergency medical care after applying the dye. “I applied the beard dye as detailed in the directions,” wrote Sean Brockton of Massachusetts in the Consumer Affairs comments section. “I had a burning sensation as well, and after rinsing it off, I thought I was fine. The next day, my face and neck had swollen up horribly. The following morning my skin had begun to weep as well, and I went to the ER. I was admitted immediately, as it looked horrible. They were concerned about my throat swelling shut. I am nearly 50 and do not have any allergies that I know of. Whatever is in this stuff is harsh. I needed steroids and Benadryl.” Customers who have been using the dye for years suspect that the formula has recently changed. J of Marietta, Georgia, wrote to Consumer Affairs that “I’ve been using it for over 10 years with no problems and in the past couple of weeks whenever I use it, there is a burning and itching. I’m going to switch to something less harsh,” According to Consumer Affairs, a company representative claims that the formula has not changed in recent years. That representative also said that users should do an allergy test before each application by testing a small patch on the inside bend of the elbow, allow it to dry, and examine it for a reaction over the next 48-hours.

Consumer Affairs points out that, based on the product label, it appears that the company knows that Just For Men can cause these symptoms. The warning reads “Rapidly spreading skin rash, dizziness, faintness, difficulty breathing, shortness of breath, tightness of chest, hives or swelling to eyes/face, blistering of skin or scalp weeping, seek immediate medical attention,” Ultimately, Consumer Affairs questioned whether or not this product is worth using if these are the risks.

Testing for Allergic Reactions

Just for Men users are advised to conduct an “allergy patch test” to determine if they will experience symptoms such as burning, itching, and painful blisters. The Just for Men website provides detailed instructions. A company representative told Consumer Affairs that it was important to perform this allergy test each time before the dye is used. This is necessary even for long-time users, the representative said, because the body chemistry may change at any time.

In the 48 hours following the test, users are told to look out for negative reactions such as stinging, burning, and/or rash. If these symptoms occur, users should stop using the dye and seek medical attention before attempting to color their hair again, the label reads. The warning says to seek immediate medical help if more serious symptoms occur, including a spreading skin rash, dizziness, faintness, difficulty breathing, shortness of breath, tightness of chest, hives or swelling to the eyes/face, blistering of skin, or scalp weeping.

As Consumer Affairs points out, it is interesting to note that the company expects the same negative symptoms reported by users. This indicates that the company knows about the potential dangers.

Testing for Allergic Reactions

Just for Men users are advised to conduct an “allergy patch test” to determine if they will experience symptoms such as burning, itching, and painful blisters. The Just for Men website provides detailed instructions. A company representative told Consumer Affairs that it was important to perform this allergy test each time before the dye is used. This is necessary even for long-time users, the representative said, because the body chemistry may change at any time.

In the 48 hours following the test, users are told to look out for negative reactions such as stinging, burning, and/or rash. If these symptoms occur, users should stop using the dye and seek medical attention before attempting to color their hair again, the label reads. The warning says to seek immediate medical help if more serious symptoms occur, including a spreading skin rash, dizziness, faintness, difficulty breathing, shortness of breath, tightness of chest, hives or swelling to the eyes/face, blistering of skin, or scalp weeping.

As Consumer Affairs points out, it is interesting to note that the company expects the same negative symptoms reported by users. This indicates that the company knows about the potential dangers.

Legal Help for Those Who Suffered Chemical Burns, Allergic Reactions After Using ‘Just For Men’

If you or a loved one suffered from pain, discomfort, chemical burns, swelling or any type of allergic reaction after using Just For Men, you may be eligible for compensation. To find out more about your legal rights, please fill out our online form to the right or call us today at 1(800) YOUR LAWYER (1-800-968-7529).