
Samsung QLED Televisions
Allegations: Falsely marketing that televisions have features that they do not have
In October 2016, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung for allegedly misleadingly concealing that its televisions use more energy than the Energy Guide labeling and advertising represent. (Coghlan et al v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Case No. 16-cv-9658, N. D. IL.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits filed against Samsung and TINA.org’s coverage of the company, click here.
Allegations: Falsely marketing that televisions have features that they do not have
Allegations: Failing to disclose that appliances emit pollutants that are harmful to people
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that smartphones of 128 GB of storage
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing the smartphone as durable
Allegations: Representing that it safeguards consumers’ personal data when such claims are not true
Allegations: Falsely marketing that the refresh rate (also known as the “Motion Rate”) of televisions is 120 Hz when the actual refresh rate is 60 Hz
Allegations: Misleading water-resistant claims
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing devices as having “supreme flexibility” when they don’t work as advertised
Allegations: Falsely marketing appliances as “fingerprint resistant” and failing to disclose that “black stainless steel” is actually regular stainless steel with a black coating that flakes and peels off
Allegations: Falsely representing the speed and storage capacity of Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphones
Allegations: Misleadingly advertising the black stainless steel finish on appliances as durable when the finish is a thin plastic coating that is prone to peel, chip and flake
The old switcheroo?