Are You Getting What You Pay For? Things are heating up and summer’s making itself known, but there’s no cooling down here at ClassAction.org. This month’s newsletter is packed with new cases and updates. And, if there’s a theme this time, it’s design defects – products that just don’t work the way they should, through no fault of your own. Sometimes companies might even know that what they’re selling isn’t up to snuff – but should they get away with it? That’s where we come in. Read about the cases below and, if you’re affected by them, let us know. Together, we’ll make our voices heard. - Simon Clark, ClassAction.org Writer |
 Attorneys working with ClassAction.org believe that some credit unions may be illegally charging overdraft fees, meaning consumers may be paying more than they should. Several banks have already faced – and settled – lawsuits over their overdraft fee practices, and credit unions are now facing similar scrutiny. There are three main ways a credit union could be wrongfully charging overdraft fees: by reordering transactions from highest to lowest (rather than processing them chronologically); by charging additional fees if the account remains in the red several days after it was overdrawn; and by charging overdraft fees for single, one-time debit card purchases even when the credit union’s own contract says it will decline such transactions. If you were charged overdraft fees by your credit union, we’d like to hear from you to see if you can take part in or start a class action lawsuit. Read more on our site about what the credit unions may be up to and find out what your options are as a consumer. |
Stryker Femoral Head Recall Sparks Lawsuits  Patients who underwent hip surgery involving Stryker’s LFIT V40 femoral head – one of the four main components of a total hip replacement – may be able to take legal action following allegations that the part is defective and poorly designed. Lawsuits are being filed alleging that the femoral head can cause serious problems including necrosis, muscle tearing, fluid buildup and pain that may require patients to undergo revision surgery to remove or replace the part. It’s thought that the problem is unique to Stryker’s LFIT V40 femoral head, which is allegedly causing more corrosion, fretting and metal wear than other systems on the market. In fact, in August 2016, Stryker voluntarily recalled certain lots of the device due to “higher than expected” failure rates, and your doctor may have indicated that this part was the source of your problems if you had to undergo a second surgery. Lawsuits against Stryker are seeking compensation for loss of enjoyment of life, loss of wages, pain and discomfort, and medical bills. Read more on our Stryker page. |
 In October of last year, Lumber Liquidators agreed to pay out $36 million to settle litigation that alleged the company’s flooring allowed for dangerous levels of formaldehyde to “off gas” into people’s homes. Now, consumers are able to submit their claims. To be eligible, you need to have purchased the company’s Chinese-made laminate flooring between January 1, 2009 and May 31, 2015. As it stands, you can claim up to $50 cash and/or a refund for a portion of the cost of your flooring. It’s important to note that the deadline for submitting claims is October 13, 2018, while the deadline to either opt out or to object to the settlement is September 4, 2018. We have a breakdown of what that means, as well as a list of the specific flooring covered by the settlement, on our new Lumber Liquidators blog. Head there for all the information. |
 Our settlements page is always being updated. Have you checked to see if you're covered by any open settlements? You can also check out the latest settlements as they happen by following us on Twitter. |
| Latest Settlements - Wilson Softball Bats
- Zicam
- JPMorgan Chase Robocalls
| | | Ending Soon - US Coachways (July 30)
- Solodyn (July 31)
- Wish.com (August 1)
| |
To view a complete list of settlements and to find out how you can file a claim, click here. |
|
|---|
| | ~ In Other News ~ | A parent whose child had an allergic reaction after eating Rice Rusks purchased at Wal-Mart has filed a lawsuit against the retailer alleging the products contained undisclosed egg and milk ingredients. According to the suit, the child was diagnosed at six months as being allergic to both milk and eggs, and the parent has since been careful to read all food labels to ensure she avoids buying products with these two common allergens. Under the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004, companies must disclose the presence of potential allergens – but Wal-Mart seems not to have done so on its Rice Rusks. After contacting the company, the suit says, the plaintiff found that the packaging displayed on Wal-Mart’s website does contain a warning that the products may contain milk and eggs – though the package bought at the company’s East Syracuse store did not, despite the plaintiff’s belief that the products are actually the same. Read more. |
| A proposed class action in California claims that NutriBullet blenders are defective and may explode without warning, even when used properly. According to the complaint, this can happen when the blender’s blades heat up the contents inside the canister, which becomes so pressurized that it can separate from other parts of the blender. The suit claims users are advised not to use the blenders for more than 60 seconds at a time – a warning, the suit says, that’s essentially useless, as the blender can overheat in less time than that, causing the pressurized canister to detach and spew hot liquid and food – and the sharp blades – into the surrounding area. The plaintiff in the case reportedly suffered second-degree burns when her own blender exploded. According to the suit, NutriBullet has known about this problem for years but has not issued a warning or product recall. Read more. |
~ Key Case Updates ~ | We’ve written before about lawsuits filed against pressure cooker manufacturers alleging that defects in the products’ design can cause dangerous explosions of hot food and liquid. Maxi-Matic, Tristar and other manufacturers have all been called out, and one company has settled after facing the heat. Now, attorneys working with ClassAction.org need your help. The case against the maker of the Maxi-Matic pressure cooker has been transferred from California, where it was being heard, to a court in Florida. This may be a problem for consumers, as Florida is, generally, a less plaintiff-friendly state, and courts may be more likely to side with corporate defendants. If you had problems with your Maxi-Matic pressure cooker, now is the time to get in touch with us to help bolster the litigation and ensure consumers get the compensation they’re owed. This may be time sensitive, so contact us today with any questions or to learn more. |
| The maker of Pyrex-brand glassware has been hit with a proposed class action lawsuit over claims that the products can shatter unexpectedly. Consumers have complained that in situations where a sudden change in temperature takes place – for example, moving Pyrex from the fridge to a hot oven – the glassware can explode into sharp pieces. This is allegedly due to a design defect and the company’s use of soda lime silicate glass – a cheaper alternative to borosilicate glass, which was originally used to produce Pyrex dishes. Corelle Brands, which makes Pyrex, has not issued any recall or warning for the products, according to the suit. To read more about the case, check out this blog post. |
New Jersey Judge Upholds J&J Talcum Powder Verdict Verdicts totaling $117 million have been upheld in a New Jersey court against Johnson & Johnson after a man claimed his decades-long exposure to the pharmaceutical company’s talcum powder product contributed to his mesothelioma. The case revolved around claims that J&J’s talcum powder contained asbestos and that this had directly contributed to the plaintiff’s health issues. Siding with the jury and denying J&J’s motion to set aside the verdicts, Superior Court Judge Ana C. Viscomi ruled that the monetary amounts “do not shock the judicial conscience.” This is the latest in a long line of rulings about talcum powder and its alleged link to health problems in those who use it. |
~ Forward to a friend ~
Know someone who might be interested in our newsletter? Why not forward this email to them?
|
|---|
|
|
Please do not reply to this message.
Replies to this message are routed to an unmonitored mailbox. Thank you. |
