TINA.org Action Sheds Light on SunPowerLED’s False Endorsement Claims
Letters alert agencies and organizations to company’s improper marketing.
In December 2013, a federal judge transferred a class-action lawsuit against Alterna Holdings Corp from federal court back to state court because the company did not establish that the amount in controversy was more than $5,000, as required to have the case in a federal court. The complaint, which was originally filed in state court in 2013, alleges that the company advertises Alterna Caviar Anti-Aging Shampoo as providing “anti-aging” benefits – such as restoring and rebalancing moisture and revitalizing brittle hair – when, in reality, the shampoo does not work as advertised. (Kenney et al v. Alterna Holdings Corp., et al, Case No. 13-cv-09014, C. D. CA.).
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding shampoo and TINA.org’s coverage of the product, click here.
Letters alert agencies and organizations to company’s improper marketing.
TINA.org discovers some roadblocks to unlocking this purportedly free offer.
New research points to “no.”
Why disclosures are key to protecting informed consumer choice and competition.
Permanently banned from MLM, Noland has found other ways to exploit consumers.