Crest Gum & Enamel Repair Toothpaste
Allegations: Falsely advertising that toothpaste will repair gums
March 2014: The appeal was dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. pursuant to a settlement agreement. The terms of the settlement have not been disclosed.
October 2013: A federal judge granted final approval of the settlement. Later in October, an objector filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the decision to approve the settlement.
February 2013: A federal judge preliminarily approved a class-action lawsuit settlement between Proctor & Gamble Co. and consumers who claimed the company falsely advertised its Crest Sensitivity Treatment & Protection toothpaste as providing relief from tooth sensitivity “within minutes.” P&G has agreed to refund the actual purchase price to Class Members who submit a valid Claim Form and documentation showing the actual price paid. For those Class Members who don’t have the proper documentation, P&G has agreed to refund them $4. (Edward Rossi v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., Case No. 11-cv-07238, D. N.J.)
Allegations: Falsely advertising that toothpaste will repair gums
Allegations: Falsely marketing that the toothpastes repair gums
Allegations: Misleadingly representing that toothpastes will repair damaged gums and enamel
Allegations: Misleadingly representing that toothpaste will repair damaged gums and enamel
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing charcoal toothpastes as safe, gentle, whitening, and healthy when they pose safety risks and are abrasive
NAD finds that air freshener’s “4=1” claims don’t add up.
With Earth Day right around the corner, here’s a handful of items whose earthy claims have been challenged.
Pampers attempts to skirt substantiation with puffery defense.
Depending on how often you shave, this club may leave you razor burned.
When did the soap game get so dirty?