Articles Posted in Consumer Class Action Lawsuits

Published on:

By

This page discuss no proof required class action lawsuits.

Our lawyers talk provide information about the following class action settlements:

LensCrafters AccuFit Panera “Free Delivery”
Grande Cosmetics Visa and Mastercard Fees
Apple Family Sharing Plan Chic-fil-A Deliveries
iPhone 7 Verizon Admin Charge
Fortnite In-Game Purchases Capital One Data Breach
DoubleDown Casino 20/20 Eye Care
Beyond Meat ATM Surcharge

Some consumer class actions do not require individual claimants to provide proof of purchase or specific documentation to give compensation.  These are the the top five reasons why some consumer class actions do not require proof of purchase.

  1. Low-value Claims: In cases where the claims are of relatively low value, the cost and effort of obtaining and verifying individual proofs of purchase may outweigh the benefits. If it costs more to go over the proof, the juice is not worth the squeeze and may be better to distribute the settlement based on claims without requiring detailed documentation from each claimant.
  2. Presumption of Impact: For certain class actions, especially those involving widespread issues like overcharging or deceptive practices, it may be presumed that if you were a customer of the company during a certain period, you were affected by the issue. Thus, specific proof beyond affirming your status as a customer may not be necessary to provide compensation.
  3. Trust-based Claims Process: Some settlements opt for a trust-based claims process, where claimants self-certify their purchase or usage of the product or service in question. This approach relies on the honesty of claimants and may include penalties for fraudulent claims to deter abuse. If you are willing to sign under penalty of perjury and lie, you are pretty foolish.  Hopefully, few people in the class are foolish.
  4. Data Availability: In situations where the defendant company has extensive sales records or other data that can verify claims, individual consumers might not need to provide their proof. The company’s records can be used to identify affected consumers or estimate the extent of their use.
  5. Legal Strategy and Settlement Terms: The decision not to require proof can be part of the negotiated terms of the settlement. Both sides may agree that eliminating the proof requirement will encourage more claimants to come forward, allowing for a quicker resolution and distribution of the settlement.

Continue Reading

Published on:

By
Data breaches have increasingly become one of the most alarming threats to both individuals and organizations. Sensitive personal and health information is often stored electronically, making it a prime target for hackers and cybercriminals.

Recent data breach investigations involving Center for Vein Restoration, Iowa Radiologic Medical Services, Atlantic Orthopaedic Specialists, Rocky Mountain Gastroenterology, Liberty First Credit Union, Anna Jaques Hospital, and an employment-related investigation at Channahon Lion Electric highlight the significant legal and financial repercussions organizations face when cybersecurity measures fail.

The Center for Vein Restoration

Continue Reading
Published on:

By

Prime Energy Drink is a new product marketed by YouTube influencers that has become extremely popular with young consumers. Prime has done a textbook job of marking to children.  Kids who do not even like the taste of Prime drink it because the like what it represents.

Recently, however, two separate consumer class action lawsuits have been filed against the makers of Prime Energy.

One lawsuit alleges that Prime Energy is falsely marketed to children despite known health risks associated with its high caffeine content.

Continue Reading
Published on:

By

Samsung, well-known for its innovations in the smartphone world, has also made a big splash in the kitchen with its line of refrigerators. These fridges, especially the fancy French door models with sleek ice makers, quickly became favorites in many homes.

But not long after these models hit the market, some serious ice maker issues started popping up, leading to a Samsung Ice Maker class action lawsuit. Here’s a closer look at what happened and where things stand now.

Continue Reading
Published on:

By

Online vape retailers, manufacturers, and labeling laboratories are at the center of a proposed class action lawsuit, which claims that consumers were misled into purchasing vape pens containing levels of hemp-derived delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9 THC) that exceed the legal threshold.

The lawsuit, initiated by lead plaintiff Hannah Ledbetter, asserts that she bought delta-8 vape pens from Cloud 9 Online Smoke & Vape LLC under the impression that the product labels accurately represented their contents. This case was brought forth on Tuesday to the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

According to the legal filing, Ledbetter had the purchased vape pens subjected to laboratory analysis, which purportedly revealed that the actual THC content far exceeded the amounts stated on their labels, showing a delta-9 THC concentration higher than the legally allowed limit of 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis.

Continue Reading
Published on:

By

The answer to this question varies depending on the specific class action settlement. Carefully review the claim filing instructions to determine whether proof of purchase is necessary when submitting your claim form.

Certain class action settlements specifically require certain forms of proof from claimants, such as a store receipt, product packaging, or another court-approved document, to support your claim for an award. However, many other settlements do not require proof of purchase for participation.

In some settlements, you may have the option to choose whether to include proof of purchase with your claim form. Typically, class members who furnish proof of purchase are eligible for a higher payout compared to those who do not provide evidence of their product or service acquisition.

Continue Reading
Published on:

By

We can all agree that NFL apparel is expensive.  A new lawsuit against the NFL claims that antitrust violations are a big part of the reason.

A class action lawsuit has been filed against the National Football League (NFL) and sports merchandise leader Fanatics in a Manhattan federal court. An Illinois resident accuses the NFL and its 32 teams of conspiring with Fanatics, based in Jacksonville, Florida, to monopolize the online retail market for licensed sports merchandise like jerseys and t-shirts. The suit claims this has led to consumers paying artificially high prices due to stifled competition.

The lawsuit alleges that instead of engaging in competitive sales, the NFL and its teams have effectively given Fanatics exclusive control over the market, with the sports merchandise company sharing its monopoly profits with the teams. This arrangement is said to have disadvantaged other retailers.

Continue Reading
Published on:

By

A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Express Company and American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. The lawsuit accuses these companies of imposing anti-competitive practices in the credit card market.  The plaintiffs’ lawsuit is based on a combination of federal and state antitrust laws, state consumer protection statutes, and claims of unjust enrichment.

This week, a group of debit card users has achieved class certification in a lawsuit against American Express Co. The class, representing users from 11 states and the District of Columbia, alleges that American Express’s rules have indirectly inflated rival card costs.

What Is the American Express Lawsuit About?

The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, represents a collective action on behalf of millions of consumers and entities who have used electronic payment methods other than American Express cards. The plaintiffs allege that American Express’s Anti-Steering Rules in its merchant agreements have unreasonably restrained trade and inflated prices in the credit and charge card transaction market.

Continue Reading
Published on:

By

Cheryl Caldwell has filed a class action lawsuit against Nordic Naturals, Inc., alleging deceptive labeling practices regarding their product “Ultimate® Omega 2X.”

Caldwell claims the “2X” designation misleads consumers into believing that the product contains twice the omega-3 content of Nordic Naturals’ “Ultimate® Omega” product. Contrary to this implication, “Ultimate Omega 2X” contains 2150 mg of omega-3 per serving, not the 2560 mg that would represent double the “Ultimate Omega” product’s 1280 mg. Caldwell argues that this discrepancy results in the product having 16% less omega-3 than what is suggested by the “2X” label.  Let’s all admit that 16% less is not “2X” but it is not that far off, right?  But still, I get it. Misleading is misleading.

Nordic Natural Class Action Claims and Allegations

Continue Reading
Published on:

By

A new class action lawsuit has been filed in Illinois federal court against The Quaker Oats Co., alleging negligence in ensuring the safety and quality of its granola products. This negligence led to the recall of over 90 varieties of breakfast items and snacks, suspected of being contaminated with salmonella during production.

On December 15, the Chicago-based company announced the recall of certain granola and oat bars and cereals due to potential salmonella exposure during processing. Salmonella is known to cause serious illnesses. The recall includes Quaker Chewy Bars in various flavors, multiple Quaker Simply Granola Oats varieties, and several Quaker snack mixes, as stated by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration.

January 12, 2024 Update

Continue Reading