1st Phorm’s ‘110% Money-Back Guarantee’
Money-back guarantee comes up woefully short of advertised percentage.
Sheiner et al. v. Supervlau Inc.
22-cv-10262, S.D.N.Y.
(Dec. 2022)
Equaline Maximum Strength Lidocaine Patches
Misleadingly marketing that products provide “Up to 8 Hours of Relief” when they do not adhere for eight hours
Misleadingly marketing products as “Maximum Strength” when they do not stay on for eight hours and, as a result, they do not deliver the “Maximum Strength” amount of lidocaine
Misleadingly marketing that products “Desensitize Aggravated Nerves” when patches are not capable of providing such relief
Pending
Money-back guarantee comes up woefully short of advertised percentage.
Is it still a guarantee if it has strings attached?
Lawsuits allege “100%” marketing on front label is misleading.
TINA.org reader was charged a lot more than the advertised price. He’s not alone.
TINA.org explores the divide between the marketing and the science.