Krazy Glue facing a Consumer Fraud Class Action Lawsuit

The Elmer’s Product Inc, which is the maker of Krazy Glue, is facing a consumer fraud class action lawsuit. Allegedly, the product packaging contains slack fill. This way, according to the lawsuit, the company is misleading its consumers.

The plaintiff’s name is David Spacone. According to him, the large and opaque packaging of the product misleads the buyers. Due to this, they think that the package contains way more glue than it actually does. More concretely, the lawsuit claims that the opaque container is over five times larger than the little tube of glue that it contains.

According to the complaint, due to the packaging, the consumers cannot directly see or handle the product. As a result, a reasonable consumer would believe that the package contains significantly more glue than it actually contains.

Spacone says that he bought Krazy Glue in Los Angeles at a True Value hardware store. He believed that he was purchasing the amount represented by the contained, instead of the small tube inside. But because the container is opaque, the consumers can never predict how much product it actually contains.

The plaintiff claims in his complaint that had he known that the container contained so little glue, he would not have bought it. Or he would at least pay less for it.
The allegation is based on the amount of nonfunctional slack fill of the container. The suit alleges that the container does not offer any protection for what it contains. Hence, it does not have any significant value at all. Also, the larger container does not have any labeling information that cannot be found on the tube. So, a question arises, “why is it there at all?”

Thus, the complaint concludes that the use of non-functional slack –fill allows the company to make more profit.

The consumer fraud class action seeks to represent three classes. The first one should be a nationwide class of the people who purchased a .07-ounce tube in a .37-ounce outer container. The second one should be the California sub-class. And the third one should be a Consumer Legal Remedies Act CA subclass.

The lawsuit states that California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act has been violated. Also allegedly, there are two violations of unfair competition law. Lee A. Cirsch, Robert K. Friedl and Trisha K. Monesi of Capstone Law APC are representing the plaintiffs.

No Comments Yet

Leave a Reply

More consumer tips and news are ahead.
Stay in touch.