Ford named in class action lawsuit over defective CP4 high pressure fuel injection pump

 

 

Ford Motor Company has sold—and continues to sell—millions of diesel trucks equipped with high-pressure fuel injection pumps that are proverbial ticking time bombs, wholly unbeknownst to an unassuming American public who pays for these vehicles’ fictitious “durability,” “longevity,” and “top notch fuel economy.” As alleged, Ford promised consumers the continued reliability of their diesel engines with increased fuel efficiency and power at greater fuel efficiency. However, this came with a hidden and catastrophic cost that was secretly passed on to consumers.

 

The culprit is the Bosch-supplied CP4 high pressure fuel injection pump, which unbeknownst to consumers is a ticking time bomb when used in American vehicles. As Ford knew before and during the Class Period (2011-2018), Bosch’s CP4 pump was never compatible with American fuel standards. The CP4 pump is not built to withstand the specifications for U.S. diesel fuel in terms of lubrication or water content, and it struggles to lift a volume of fuel sufficient to lubricate itself. As a result, the pump is forced to run dry and destroy itself as air bubbles allow metal to rub against metal. The pump secretly deposits metal shavings and debris throughout the fuel injection system and the engine until it suddenly fails without warning, further contaminating the fuel delivery system with larger pieces of metal.

 

This pump failure often can occur as early as “mile 0,” as the fuel injection disintegration process begins at the very first fill of the tank. This total fuel injection system failure and consequential engine failure results in an outrageously expensive repair bill, all for a repair that will not truly ameliorate the issue so long as the vehicle is being filled with U.S. diesel. And, although complete and total pump failure takes time to occur, the defective CP4 pump starts damaging the vehicle’s fuel injection system and engine immediately upon the vehicle’s first use. Further, the sudden and unexpected shutoff of the vehicle’s engine while it is in motion and then subsequent inability to restart the vehicle present an inherent risk to consumer safety—one which Ford itself has recognized in the past. Thus, Plaintiffs and other Class members have suffered from a defect that existed in the Class Vehicles, upon the first use of the Class Vehicles. Plaintiffs and other Class members are seeking recovery for this manifested and immediately damaging defect, in addition to any and all consequential damages stemming therefrom.

 

According to the complaint, Ford blames the failures on “fuel contamination,” which is not covered under their warranties because it is “not caused by Ford.” Consumers are left with repair bills that range from $8,000.00 to $20,000.00 per vehicle.

 

Ford sought to use the CP4 system in American vehicles, promising consumers exactly what they were looking for—improvements in torque, horsepower, durability, and fuel economy. But Ford could never deliver on that promise for American vehicles because the CP4 fuel pump is not compatible with American diesel fuel; in fact, Ford knew this before and during the Class Period, and equipped its modern Power Stroke diesel vehicles with the European-designed CP4 fuel pump anyway.

 

Ford knew, from the specifications of the pump as compared to the specifications of American diesel, the Bosch-made CP4 Pump was clearly incompatible with the ordinary use of American diesel fuel. That is, well before Ford ever chose to implement the CP4 component part (as incorporated in the diesel engines of the subject Class Vehicles), the issue of incompatibility was (or should have been) known and yet was totally ignored in the design of the Class Vehicles’ engine systems. This is further evidenced by the fact that Ford had experience with widespread catastrophic fuel injection pump failures when cleaner diesel standards were first implemented in the 1990s. By 2002, the Truck & Engine Manufacturers Association (“EMA”)—of which Ford is a member company1—acknowledged that the lower lubricity of American diesel could cause catastrophic failure in fuel injection system components that are made to European diesel specifications.

 

Not only did Ford fail to inform American consumers and fail to stop touting the fabricated benefits of the vehicles containing CP4 pumps, they actively attempted to shift the blame to American consumers. For instance, in 2010, Ford claimed it was consumers’ improper use of contaminated or substandard fuels that damaged the vehicles’ fuel system, even when Ford knew that the malfunction was actually the result of the CP4 fuel injection pump design, which was simply not fit for American diesel fuel.

COMPLAINT

Outernational Brands, makers of Vivaloe beverages, named in class action lawsuit for misleading advertising

Outernational Brands manufactures and sells a variety of purportedly natural fruit flavored products known as Vivaloe beverage products. As alleged, the labeling of the Products are false and misleading and the Products thus are misbranded under California consumer protection laws. Specifically, the Products are labeled as if they are flavored only with natural ingredients when they in fact contain an undisclosed artificial flavor, malic acid, in violation of state and federal law.

According to the complaint, Defendant’s labeling and advertising scheme is intended to give consumers the impression that they are buying premium, all-natural products with only natural flavoring ingredients instead of products that contains artificial chemicals and that are artificially flavored.

Outernational 11-15-18

Premier Nutrition Corporation settles class action lawsuit relating to protein content of ready-To-Drink Protein Shake Products

A settlement has been reached resolving a class action lawsuit related to the marketed protein content of certain Premier Protein Ready-To-Drink Protein Shake Products. The lawsuit argued that Premier Protein shakes did not include as much protein as their product labeling and advertising indicate.

The settlement, if approved by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, would provide $9,000,000 to pay (1) Class Members who submit eligible claims, (2) attorneys’ fees and expenses, (3) a service award to the Class Representative, and (4) notice and claims administration costs.

You are a Class Member if you purchased any of the following Premier Protein Ready-To Drink Shake products in the United States from August 8, 2011 through October 12, 2018: Vanilla, Chocolate, Strawberries & Cream, Banana & Cream, Peaches & Cream, Cookies & Cream, Mixed Berry, Organic Chocolate, Organic Vanilla and Caramel flavors (the “Products”)

Information regarding the settlement can be found at https://www.proteinshakesettlement.com/

 

Champion Pet Foods named in class action lawsuit for failure to disclose presence of heavy metals in pet food

 

Plaintiff brings this Class Action Complaint against Defendants Champion Petfoods USA, Inc. and Champion Petfoods LP for their negligent, reckless, and/or intentional practice of misrepresenting and failing to fully disclose the presence of heavy metals and toxins in their pet food sold throughout the United States.

 

According to the complaint, Defendants have created a niche in the pet food market by making biologically appropriate’ pet food- as close to what animals would eat in nature as possible- and producing it using fresh, natural ingredients. Yet nowhere in the labeling, advertising, statements, warranties, and/or packaging do Defendants disclose that the Contaminated Pet Foods (defined herein) contain levels of arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium and/or BISPHENOL A (“BPA”) — all known to pose health risks to humans and animals, including dogs.

COMPLAINT

Iberia Foods named in class action lawsuit for deceptively advertising olive oil

This is a consumer protection action arising out of the deceptive and otherwise improper business practices that Defendant, IBERIA FOOD CORP. engages in through the packaging, marketing, and sale of the 68 Fl. Oz. Iberia Premium Blend Extra Virgin Olive Oil (“the Product”). The Product is sold in misleadingly labeled containers where the words “Extra Virgin Olive Oil” are emboldened and holographic whilst the words “Sunflower Oil &” above these are printed inconspicuously in indistinct, camouflaged ink and narrow font that is barely distinguishable from the background and is readily overlooked by consumers.

As alleged, the “Extra Virgin Olive Oil” is in conspicuous gold that is prominent to the eye. By contrast, the sunflower oil disclosure is in black typeset that blends into the dark green background and will be readily missed once the more ostentatious olive oil disclosure catches the hurried shopper’s eye. By highlighting and emboldening “Extra Virgin Olive Oil” while simultaneously obscuring “Sunflower Oil &” in camouflaged ink, Defendant intends to mislead the rushed and unsuspecting consumer into believing that the Product is entirely comprised of Extra Virgin Olive Oil. Defendant intends for consumers to believe that they are purchasing a product which they are not.

This deception is particularly brazen and egregious given that the Product is only 20% extra virgin olive oil and an entire 80% refined sunflower oil. Defendant thus goes out of its way to highlight the minor ingredient while obscuring the major one.

COMPLAINT

Coca-Cola sued over advertising of Hansen’s Natural sodas

 

Defendant manufactures, markets, advertises, and sells a line of products in the “alternative” soda beverage category, which Defendant prominently labels and sells as “Hansen’s Natural” sodas Defendant uses the “natural” branding strategy and labeling claim as the primary feature differentiating Hansen’s Natural Sodas from other soda products in the marketplace. However, Defendant’s advertising and marketing is false, deceptive and misleading because each Hansen’s Natural Soda product contains one or more artificial and/or synthetic, non-natural ingredients, including Ascorbic Acid, Citric Acid, and Caramel Color.

 

COMPLAINT

Diamond Foods named in class action lawsuit over “made with natural ingredients”  and no preservative representations

 

This is a consumer protection action seeking redress for, and a stop to, Defendant’s unfair and deceptive practice of advertising and marketing its line of potato chips (the ” Products”) as “Made with Natural Ingredients” and having no preservatives.

Products include:

Organic Sea Salt & Vinegar Potato Chips

Salt & Fresh Ground Pepper Krinkle Cut Potato Chips

Backyard Barbecue Potato Chips

Chili Lime Potato Chips

Buffalo Blue Krinkle Cut Potato Chips

Sour Cream and Onion Potato Chips

Pepperoncini Potato Chips

Tropical Salsa Potato Chips

Fiery Thai Potato Chips

Country Style Barbecue Potato Chips

Honey Dijon Potato Chips

New York Cheddar Potato Chips

As alleged, defendant’s “No Preservatives” representations are false, deceptive and misleading because the Products contain the preservative, citric acid. This labeling deceives consumers into believing that they are receiving healthier preservative free beverages even though these products cannot live up to these claims.

The complaint also alleges that Defendant’s “Made with Natural Ingredients'” representations are false, deceptive, and misleading because the preservative, citric acid, is a synthetic compound and thus not natural.

Diamond Foods 10-4-18

Blue Diamond Growers  named in class action lawsuit alleging false advertising

Blue Diamond Growers  manufactures, distributes, markets, labels and sells “Almond Nut-Thins” (crackers) under the “Blue Diamond Almonds” brand.

The Products’ common principal display panel representations include (i) their name, “Almond Nut-Thins,” (ii) a more specific identification as “Nut & Rice Cracker Snacks,” and (iii) vignettes of almonds. The back of the packages state “As The Almond People®, we’re pretty partial to almonds in anything, but we think you’ll agree these crispy crackers go well with almost anything.

As alleged, the Products are misleading because despite the labels naming them “Almond NutThins” and more specifically identifying them as “Nut & Rice Cracker Snacks,” they are actually rice-flour based crackers, which happen to include equivalent amounts of “almonds” as they do “potatoes.”

According to the complaint, Plaintiff believed the Almond Products were made with almonds as predominant ingredient in the same way consumers would observe wheat crackers and reasonably expect they were composed mainly of wheat. Plaintiff desired to purchase a product that was made primarily of almond ingredients and believed that the predominant ingredients was almonds or derived from almonds.

National Beverage Corp  makers of LaCroix Sparkling Waters named in class action lawsuit over false advertising of product as natural

 

This is a class action against National Beverage Corp. d/b/a LaCroix Sparkling Waters to stop their practice of mislabeling their signature product, LaCroix Water, as “all-natural.” LaCroix Water is manufactured using non-natural flavorings and synthetic compounds, and Defendant continues to mislead consumers into believing that their product is natural when it is not.

According to the complaint, the water contains ethyl butanoate, Iimonene, linalool and linalool propionate — chemical compounds that are synthetically created and added to consumable goods to make those goods taste or smell a certain way.

COMPLAINT

CVS named in class action lawsuit over adulterated thyroid tablets

This is a class action lawsuit over thyroid tablets manufactured and distributed by Westminster Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“Westminster”) and sold through and by CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (“CVS”).

Specifically, the lawsuit pertains to Defendants Westminster’s manufacturing and distribution of adulterated generic prescription thyroid medications containing Levothyroxine and Liothyronine tablets for oral use, branded as “Thyroid Tablets, USP” or “Thyroid Tablets” (hereafter, “Thyroid Tablets”). CVS sold these adulterated generic prescription medications to Plaintiff and other similarly situated consumers.

Levothyroxine (tetraiodothyronine sodium) and Liothyronine (liothyronine sodium) are generic prescription medications indicated as replacement or supplemental therapy in patients with hypothyroidism, among other conditions. Westminster combines both compounds into a generic formulation consisting of a single oral tablet, which is branded as “Thyroid Tablets, USP” or “Thyroid Tablets.” However, due to manufacturing defects originating from overseas laboratories in China, Westminster’s formulation has become adulterated.

On August 9, 2018, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) posted a notice of a voluntary recall of Thyroid Tablets by Westminster subsequent to multiple violations of the Food Drug and Cosmetics and good manufacturing practices issued there under.

As alleged, Plaintiff and the Class were injured by paying the full purchase price of their Thyroid Tablets. These medications are worthless, as they have been found to be adulterated and are not fit for human consumption.

COMPLAINT