
1st Phorm’s ‘110% Money-Back Guarantee’
Money-back guarantee comes up woefully short of advertised percentage.
In July 2014, a federal judge dismissed a class-action lawsuit against Kind, LLC. The complaint, which was originally filed in 2013, alleged that Kind misleadingly marketed products – including Vanilla Blueberry Clusters with Flax Seeds – as containing “evaporated cane juice” when they actually contain sugar. The judge dismissed the complaint because, among other things, the named plaintiff did not sufficiently allege that she or another reasonable consumer would be deceived by Kind’s representations. The judge dismissed the complaint without prejudice, meaning the plaintiffs may refile. (Ibarrola et. al, v. Kind, LLC, Case No. 13-cv-50377, N.D. IL.).
For more information about other class-action lawsuits related to claims of evaporated cane juice and TINA.org’s coverage of the issue, click here.
For more information about other class-action lawsuits filed against Kind and TINA.org’s coverage of the company, click here.
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.