Top 10 Class Action Lawsuits – March 2016

  1. Stevia – The Stevia in the Raw class action lawsuit alleges that the defendant profited enormously by claiming their product was 100% natural when in fact it contained dextrose and maltodextrin, a highly processed byproduct of GMO corn. Submit your claim here.
  2. Verizon – Verizon Wireless agreed to settle a class action lawsuit that accused the wireless phone company of using a third-party debt collector to place robocalls on their behalf in violation of federal and state laws. Submit your claim here.
  3. LR Credit – This lawsuit is about whether Defendants improperly collected debts from people in New York. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants used fraudulent practices to file debt collection lawsuits, obtain default judgments, and then collect on those judgments. Submit your claim here.
  4. Interstate – Lead plaintiff Diana Mey filed the TCPA class action lawsuit after allegedly receiving a phone call from Interstate to her cellphone which was a number registered on the National Do Not Call Registry. Mey says that Interstate was attempting to sell her an extended warranty on her car and were in possession of her vehicle information (including her VIN number) regardless of the fact that she had never made an inquiry about a warranty. Submit your claim here.
  5. PayPal – Plaintiffs in this case allege, among other things, that PayPal improperly handled disputed transactions on PayPal accounts and improperly placed holds, reserves, or limitations on accounts or closed or suspended accounts. Plaintiffs also allege that PayPal failed to provide them with annual error-resolution notices and monthly account statements allegedly required under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. Submit your claim here.
  6. LifeLock – The Lawsuit claims that LifeLock made misrepresentations which generally fall into four categories: (1) LifeLock’s promise to provide “comprehensive” services in detecting fraud; (2) Lifelock’s promise to provide timely and continuous alerts of potential fraud twenty four hours a day, seven days a week, three hundred sixty five days a year; (3) Lifelock’s promise regarding its information security program; and (4) LifeLock’s promise to provide a “$1 Million Total Service Guarantee,” which the Class Representatives allege purports to promise insurance in an amount up to $1,000,000 against identity theft. Submit claim here.
  7. XL Foods Meat Products – The XL Foods class action lawsuit accuses the company of negligence, specifically in the design and implementation of control, sampling and testing procedures. According to the complaint, XL Foods was also sloppy when it came to managing the product recall. Submit your claim here.
  8. HSBC – The HSBC class action lawsuit claimed that as a regular practice, the bank allowed customers to use their debit cards to make purchases when their accounts were insufficient in order to charge an overdraft fee of $35. Submit your claim here.
  9. Abercrombie and Hollister – The lawsuit resolves allegations that Abercrombie & Fitch Co. and its subsidiaries violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by sending text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without their consent. Submit your claim here.
  10. Allstate – The lawsuit alleges that some Allstate policyholders with automobile policies issued between Nov. 27, 2009 and Dec. 29, 2015 were denied the benefit of a waiver of their collision deductible when they submitted a collision claim to Allstate involving an accident with an uninsured motorist, pursuant to Allstate’s California Amendatory Endorsement AU2250-6 or AU2250-7. Submit your claim here.


Top 10 Class Action Lawsuits – December 2015

 Class Action Lawsuits

  1. Fake Black Friday Sales – Plaintiffs contend that California residents may qualify for a free class action lawsuit investigation if you purchased a sale item at Best Buy, Kohl’s, Target and/or Tiger Direct during a Black Friday sale. Join the class action lawsuit here.
  2. MAC Cosmetics – The lawsuit alleges that MAC employees asked for ZIP code information from MA residents under the pretense that it was necessary to complete credit card transactions, when it was used to identify customer’s addresses using commercially available databases. Submit your claim here.
  3. Fire Insurance Exchange – Plaintiffs allege that Fire Insurance Exchange improperly took excess depreciation in determining actual cash value, which resulted in the underpayment of some property loss or damage claims. Submit your claim here.
  4. Earth Friendly – The lawsuit alleges that the defendants made advertising claims indicating that their products were all natural when in fact some contained methylisothiazolinone (MIT) which is a powerful allergen and skin irritant. Submit your claim here.
  5. Volkswagen Diesel – Allegations have been made against Volkswagen of America claiming the company used “defeat devices” in their diesel engine vehicles 2009-2015 to cheat on emissions testing. Submit your claim here.
  6. Zara FACTA – The lawsuit alleges that Zara violated federal law by printing more than the last four digits of credit card account numbers on receipts it provided to customers. Submit claim here.
  7. Electrolux Ice Maker – The ice maker class action lawsuit accused Frigidaire of acting deceptively in designing, manufacturing, selling and servicing “French Door” refrigerators with a certain type of ice maker. The plaintiffs allege that the Electrolux ice maker is defective. Submit your claim here.
  8. Rite Aid Records – The lawsuit alleges that an allegedly arbitrary “flat-fee” price to get a printed copy of their records. Lasseter claims he was charged $50 for a one-page document that included his pharmaceutical history. Likewise, Osborne states she was charged $85 for a single-page pharmacy record document. The “fixed fee” charges are in no way rational to the actual cost of Rite Aid processing a request for records. Lasseter and Osborne further claim that Rite Aid violated federal law for charging a flat fee. Submit your claim here.
  9. Public Storage – Allegations have been made against Public Storage that they deceived its Florida tenants by representing it would send the premiums collected through the sale of self-storage insurance to an independent insurance company, but they actually retained more than 75% of the premiums. Submit your claim here.
  10. HomeServe – The plaintiffs allege that HomeServe marketed, promoted and sold the Service Plans without disclosing that New Jersey residents were excluded from coverage. Submit your claim here.


Questions Answered About VW Emissions Fraud

Car emits carbon dioxideThe news that Volkswagen had deliberately circumvented U.S. EPA emissions laws on its so-called “clean diesel” models from 2009 to 2015 hit the automotive world like a bombshell. The company also took all remaining new 2.0-liter TDI diesel models off sale in the U.S.–and told its dealers to stop selling those models as used cars as well.

What VW vehicles are affected by the recall?

The cars covered by the expected recall were sold by Volkswagen and Audi between 2009 and 2015, and powered by a 2.0-liter turbocharged diesel engine. That earned them the designation “TDI” following the model name.

The highest-volume model is the Volkswagen Jetta TDI, but VW also offered TDI versions of the Passat, Golf, Jetta SportWagen and the Beetle. The recall will also apply to the Audi A3 TDI, in two generations: both the one sold from 2009 through 2013, and the new version introduced for 2015.

But across those models there are actually two engines in three versions. The most common is the 140-hp “EA188” 2.0-liter turbodiesel four introduced for 2009. That same engine in the Passat TDI was fitted with Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR), also known as urea after-treatment, starting in 2012.

Finally, a new generation of 2.0-liter diesel engine, known as EA288, is fitted to various VW vehicles (the Golf TDI, for instance) starting with the 2015 model year.

Note that Volkswagen and Audi vehicles equipped with larger TDI diesel engines are not affected.

Those include the Audi Q5 and Q7, and the Volkswagen Touareg.

What should owners of 2009-2015 Audi and Volkswagen TDI diesels with 2.0-liter four-cylinder engines do?

In the short term, nothing.

Volkswagen is committed to fixing this issue as soon as possible. We want to assure customers and owners of these models that their automobiles are safe to drive, and we are working to develop a remedy that meets emissions standards and satisfies our loyal and valued customers.”

Owners of these vehicles do not need to take any action at this time.

This means that the vehicles in question will all be recalled so VW can attempt to modify them in a way that would make them legal.

Until a remedy is devised, tested, approved by the EPA and CARB and distributed to dealers, owners should simply keep driving their cars.

What are the risks to VW owners?

The owners of 2009-2015 Volkswagen and Audi 2.0-liter TDI models face some potentially significant longer-term challenges.

First, the value of their vehicles as used cars may well fall.

They paid more for their cars: Premiums over comparable gasoline models range from $1,000 on Golfs with mid-and high-level trims to $6,855 on top-level Passat models. While used diesels historically were worth more on the used-car market, that may not prove to be the case going forward.

Second, if VW is able to develop a fix and get it approved, the performance and fuel efficiency of their cars might fall. That’s more likely if the fix is only a software update, which would be far cheaper for Volkswagen.

If VW ends up having to make software changes and retrofit an entire SCR system to the cars (other than the Passat TDI)–something that would likely cost it thousands of dollars per car–performance would likely be unchanged, but interior volume might be reduced to accommodate a liquid-urea tank and associated plumbing.

Third, and most worrisome for owners in California and some other states, they may not be able to re-sell or even re-register their TDI vehicles until they are fixed by Volkswagen.

That’s because the vehicles were apparently “non-compliant,” or illegal to sell in the first place as they now stand.

Lipitor MDL Type 2 Diabetes Lawsuits Reaches 2,200

Lipitor LawsuitsLipitor (Atorvastatin) lawsuits against pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. continues to steadily grow. Plaintiffs claim the drug was the trigger to their diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. They further allege that prior to the mandated label change by the FDA in 2012 no warnings existed to alert them of the potential type 2 diabetes side effect. Lipitor was approved by the FDA in 1996 and has exceeded $125 billion in sales since that time.

The Lipitor label change in February of 2012 made consumers more aware that type 2 diabetes was a possibility. The FDA advised doctors and patients that “people being treated with statins may have an increased risk of raised blood sugar levels and the development of type 2 diabetes.”

Pfizer begs to differ, claiming that the risk for type 2 diabetes was clearly addressed on the official prescribing label for Lipitor prior to 2012. The original reference stated that, “Increases in HbA1c and fasting serum glucose levels have been reported with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, Including LIPITOR.” Most consumers do not understand that medical terminology. They protest it was not a clear warning message, at best it was cryptic. Pfizer maintains that the original warning was sufficient.

Plaintiff Margaret Clark, who had no diabetes risk triggers prior to the use of Lipitor to keep her LDL cholesterol in check, was blindsided when she was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. She was fit, exercised regularly, maintained a healthy weight and diet. She claims that there was no apparent or obvious reference to diabetes risk she could see on the pre-2012 Lipitor label. She is among thousands of others with similar claims.

Diabetes is a lifelong disease that requires careful daily management to ensure your blood sugar levels remain normal, instead of increased. Diabetics can experience serious complications affecting the heart, eyes, kidneys, circulatory and nervous system, gums and teeth.

There are more than 2,200 lawsuits in the Lipitor MDL Litigation, MDL No. 2502, US District Court, District of South Carolina. If you or someone you love has developed type 2 diabetes due to use of the statin medication Lipitor you may be entitled to compensation. Contact a Lipitor attorney to find out if you are eligible.