Posts Tagged ‘ Consumer Fraud ’

UK Watchdog Slams Special K Calorie Count, Bans Ads

July 10th, 2012. By AbiK

You know that Special K Challenge? That’s the one where you eat a Special K breakfast and lunch, and then have a ‘sensible meal’ for dinner—along with whatever fruits and vegetables you want, and the beverages you ‘normally’ have. And you’re supposed to lose weight…and fit into those jeans you’ve long since busted out of.

A twice-a-day Special K diet may help you shed some pounds, but the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) over in the UK has taken issue with some of Kellogg’s Special K advertising. It seems that some of the Special K advertising has promoted the breakfast cereal as adding only  114 calories per serving to a daily diet—why, that’s a meal with just a few teeny calories over a “100-calorie” snack pack!

Surely, you can’t go wrong on your diet with that.

But, the UK ad watchdog has seen something wrong how the calories are counted in the Special K ads: where’s the milk? And that’s led to a false advertising slap on the wrist.

Seems a number of Brits—and, of course, Americans—eat their cereal with milk. And as such, the UK Special K ads showed women preparing their cereal breakfast by pouring milk into it. Those aforementioned 114 calories don’t account for the milk. And if  you add the milk back into the equation, that can boost the calorie count up to anywhere between 200 and 236 calories.

According to a recent report in the Daily Mail (7/4/12), Kellogg’s responded to a complaint the ASA received by stating that the company left out the milk calories because “many customers eat the cereal dry, or with orange juice or yogurt.”

That response, apparently, did not measure up enough for the ASA. The Special K ads have been banned.

Tags: Advertising Standards Authority, Consumer Fraud, false advertising, Kellogg's, Special K, Special K Diet, UK
Posted in Consumer Fraud | 1 Comment »

Oy Vey: Hebrew National Hot Dogs Class Action Alleges Kosher Fraud

June 19th, 2012. By AbiK

Whoever heard of such a thing? Hebrew National hot dogs not kosher? Who knew?

Well, those are the allegations in the recently filed class action lawsuit against Hebrew National hot dog maker, ConAgra Foods Inc. that alleges negligence and violations of state consumer fraud laws.

Yes, that Hebrew National—as in the brand mostly responsible for bringing Orthodox Jewish dietary law to the grocery shopping masses with the tagline “we answer to a higher authority”. And, unlike matzo at Passover, those Hebrew National franks stayed in the refrigerated section all year long!

Seems a group of consumers don’t think Hebrew National should be overstaying their welcome on store shelves if they’re not going to be kosher law-abiding citizens.

The group of eleven plaintiffs allege that Hebrew National shouldn’t be labeling their hot dogs and other products as “kosher” (indicated by the “triangle K” symbol) because, according to the lawsuit, ConAgra’s meat processing service—provided by AER Services, Inc.— does not have meat processing services that meet the standards necessary for a product to be labeled “kosher”.

Kosher products can often times sell at premium prices—the video above gives an idea on what’s involved in making meat kosher—and that’s part of the plaintiffs’ beef in this class action as well. By labeling the Hebrew National hot dogs as “kosher”, ConAgra was allegedly able to charge a premium, thereby misleading consumers into paying more for their franks.

According to a report from Reuters, the plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages and an injunction against further mislabeling. They’re also seeking class action status for the lawsuit in which the Class would include U.S. purchasers of Hebrew National products over the last four years.

More to come…

Tags: AER Services, Class Action Lawsuit, ConAgra, Consumer Fraud, Hebrew National, Kosher Hot Dog Fraud
Posted in Class Action, Emerging Issues, lawsuits | 15 Comments »

Oscillo Flu Relief Settlement Preliminary Approval: Here’s What To Do

May 26th, 2012. By AbiK

Remember this one? The Oscillo Flu Relief false advertising class action? Or, for those of you who can pronounce it, the Oscillococcinum class action lawsuit…which basically alleged that a couple of homeopathic ingredients and sugar may not actually do a blessed thing (expect perhaps a placebo effect) on curing or diminishing your flu symptoms.

Well, the class action lawsuit was actually against Boiron and it covered more than Oscillo. Now, it’s got a preliminary approval on its settlement. So here we go with the settlement details…

Am I part of the Oscillo Flu Relief Class Action Settlement?

You are if you purchased Oscillococcinum, Children’s Oscillococcinum, Arnicare, Quietude, Camilia, Coldcalm and ‘other products manufactured by Boiron’ between Jan. 1, 2000 and the present. You’re NOT a part of the class for this settlement if you were a California resident whose only purchase of a Boiron product was of Children’s Coldcalm in California after August 31, 2006.

What do I get as part of the Oscillo Flu Relief Class Action Settlement?

As with all class action settlements, the amount each class member receives will be contingent on how many claimants (ie, class members) submit a claim form. However, class members who file timely and valid claims (see below) are eligible to receive up to $100.00 per household.

For this settlement, a settlement fund of $5 million is being set up to pay claims to eligible Class Members, attorneys’ fees and costs, and the notice and claims administration costs. Boiron (the company that makes Oscillo) is also agreeing to make certain changes to the manner in which it advertises the products involved in the class action lawsuit.

What do I have to do now?

Here are your options to…

Submit a Claim: Do not submit a claim here at LawyersandSettlements.com. You can submit your Oscillo claim form at the claims administrator’s website here: http://www.gilardi.com/boironsettlement/FileClaim.

Otherwise, you will need to send in a completed claim form and, if available, proof of purchase of the applicable Boiron products you’ve purchased to the Claims Administrator (address shown below). Your claim must be postmarked no later than 45 days after the date the Court enters the Judgment.

The Court will hold a hearing on August 13, 2012 at 2:30 p.m. at the federal courthouse at 940 Front Street, Courtroom 11, San Diego, CA 92101, to consider final approval of the Boiron settlement, including payment of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to Class Counsel related to obtaining the settlement relief, an incentive award to each of the named Plaintiffs, and related issues.

Object to the Settlement: If you want to object to the Oscillo settlement you have to file a written statement with the Court and serve a copy on Class Counsel, Counsel for Defendants and the Claims Administrator, postmarked by July 14, 2012. Instructions for how to object are explained in the detailed notice at www.gilardi.com/boironsettlement.

Exclude yourself from the Settlement: If you do not want to be bound by the settlement, you must send a letter to the Claims Administrator at the address below requesting to be excluded. The letter must be postmarked by July 14, 2012. If you exclude yourself, you cannot receive a benefit from this settlement, but you can sue the manufacturer of the Products for the claims alleged in this lawsuit. If you do not exclude yourself from the settlement or do nothing, you will be bound by the Court’s decisions.

For more information and to obtain a detailed notice, claim form, list of Products, or other documents, visit www.gilardi.com/boironsettlement or call, toll-free, 877-256-3879, or write to Boiron Claims Administrator, P.O. Box 8060, San Rafael, CA 94912-8060.

Tags: Boiron, Class Action Lawsuit, Consumer Fraud, false advertising, Homeopathic remedy, Oscillo Flu Relief Settlement
Posted in Class Action, Consumer Fraud, Drugs/Medical, Emerging Issues, Settlement | No Comments »

POM Juice Misleads Again with “Doctored” Ads

May 25th, 2012. By AbiK

Unfortunately, advertising isn’t quite held to the same ethical bar that journalism (usually) is. There’s a careful and deliberate selection of each and every word in an ad—and you’re delusional if you think otherwise. But the folks over at POM Wonderful pomegranate juice have taken their selectivity a bit far this week in rolling out an ad campaign that serves as their rebuttal of sorts to the false advertising ruling made by Judge D. Michael Chappell.

Judge Chappell’s ruling was in response to an FTC complaint regarding the alleged health claims that POM was making about the popular juice. The bottom line? POM was found to have insufficient evidence to support its claims that its pomegranate juice reduced the risk of heart disease—as well as prostate cancer (and even impotence—gee, maybe they should’ve teamed up with Merck to help Propecia victims overcome ED while they were at it). The judge also issued a cease-and-desist order that forbids POM from making such claims for 20 years.

So what does POM do? In true catfight fashion, they stoop to childlike tactics and run some ads that use pull-quotes from the judge’s ruling—out of context. For example, one ad states (from the ruling) that, “Competent and reliable scientific evidence supports the conclusion that the consumption of pomegranate juice and pomegranate extract supports prostate health, including by prolonging PSA doubling time in men with rising PSA after primary treatment for prostate cancer”

But it cuts off there without the following statement: “However, the greater weight of the persuasive expert testimony shows that the evidence relied upon by the respondents is not adequate to substantiate claims that POM products treat, prevent or reduce the risk of prostate cancer or that they are clinically proven to do so.”

It’s an interesting ‘rebuttal’ as, without clinical studies supporting the health claims—studies that would stand up in a court of law, that is—the ads POM is running could actually backfire; after all, rather than just go quietly and not draw further attention to the ruling, now the media will be all over the ads (as we are). And without the ‘scientific proof’ it certainly starts to become transparent that this may well be more about sales and revenue impact than any grand gesture to promote the curative benefits of some medicinal elixir.

Well, as they say, you be the judge—and let us know what you think.

Tags: Consumer Fraud, false advertising, FTC, Judge D Michael Chappell, POM pomegranate juice, POM Wonderful
Posted in Complaints/Comments, Consumer Fraud, Emerging Issues, lawsuits, Personal Injury | No Comments »

Is ‘Jesus Heals’ False Advertising When He Doesn’t?

May 7th, 2012. By AbiK

Cruising down I-95 a while back there was a billboard that simply said, “Jesus Saves”. No idea who sponsored it, though one would imagine it was a Christian organization of some sort. Regardless, as with most billboards, it was advertising something. In this case, Jesus. The come-on of course being that if you “buy” Jesus, He’ll seal the transaction by saving you (or your soul). But, what if He doesn’t? Is that false advertising?

Well, a recent Australian billboard took things a bit further by saying, “Jesus Heals Cancer” (see picture, photo by Paul Taylor, nzherald). The billboard also reportedly had a tally of those whom Jesus had apparently healed—a total of six cancer survivors. Glory be to God.

However, not everyone was happy with the Jesus Heals billboard—including an Australian family whose 3 year old son is undergoing treatment for leukemia. Their beef? The sign read like a factual statement—not a message of hope, and therefore, it’s misleading—and offensive.

Amen.

And one can only wonder had the 3 year old been old enough to read, how would mommy and daddy be expected to explain why Jesus hadn’t healed him yet? Were they not ‘good enough’ Christians (assuming, of course, that they’re Christians)? Why was he being ostracized from the healthy and the cleansed?

After the Australian Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received a total of nine such complaints, it launched an investigation into the matter. The result? The ASA deemed that while the sponsor of the ad did not have any intention to offend, it clearly did not display the ‘”due sense of social responsibility required” and therefore breached the code of ethics.’ (nzherald.co.nz)

Unfortunately, most of us know someone who—even with ‘taking the narrow path’ in life—has succumbed to cancer. And most practicing Christians certainly believe that while God is omnipotent, there is only so much He can, or will, do—leaving us mere mortals to find solace in platitudes like “God must have needed him/her in heaven”. What else is there to say, after all?

The billboard in Australia was the work of the Equippers Church—their tagline: “Equipping People for Life through Faith in Jesus Christ”. Here’s an excerpt from one of their web pages (boldface added by author):

Equippers exists to create an environment where young and old of every culture can easily connect and discover the purpose of their existence. We value the different cultures that make up our community, however we also believe in the importance in having the same spirit in all our expressions. We encourage everyone to put the culture of the Kingdom ahead of their own cultural expectations, as we become united in the same purpose, the cause of Christ.

We believe that the Bible is inspired by God—that it is accurate authoritative and applicable to every part of our lives. Our desire is to communicate the message of God’s word without compromise in a relevant, life-giving way.

Draw your own conclusions from the above, but one word comes to mind: fundamentalist. To round out your picture of the Equippers Church, a few applicable keywords might be: Christian contemporary music, missions, ministries, Hallelujah Project, Shout Conference. You get the vibe. Unfortunately, the vibe tends to call for drinking the proverbial kool-aid and encouraging others to partaketh of the cup as well. Even if it means buying a billboard to proselytize the weak into thinking they’ll be ‘healed’.

To their credit, they do practice what they preach and do so with apparent conviction—case in point, here’s an example from Senior Pastor Kathy Monk’s twitter stream:

Choose to do life with Jesus, the other alternative is ridiculous, stupid & deadly…#JustDoIt

Deadly? Stupid?

Wouldn’t that be a nice message for a cancer patient right now—yes, Jesus heals cancer—but wait there’s more!—an addendum that didn’t make it onto the billboard: to NOT follow Jesus is deadly! And guess what? If you don’t follow Him, you’re stupid, too! Christianity at it’s most ‘Christian’ there, right? Thankfully not the Christianity I grew up with (for the record, I’m Christian born and bred.)

So yes, clearer minds prevailed on this one. The sign was apparently updated to read: “Jesus Heals every Sickness & Every Disease – Matthew 4:23”. Which, from a false advertising perspective is just fine. After all, when you’re trying to promote what’s in essence a best-selling book and its book club, what better to use than a pull quote?

Tags: Consumer Fraud, Equippers Australia, Equippers Church, false advertising, Jesus Heals Billboard
Posted in Consumer Fraud, Emerging Issues | 1 Comment »