Rust-Oleum Restore Deck Coating is Defective, Class Action Lawsuit Says

A class action lawsuit was filed against The Home Depot Inc. and Rust-Oleum Corp. in New York federal court alleging the companies manufactured and marketed a liquid armor resurfacer called “Restore” as a protective coating that was ultimately defective and ended up cracking and peeling.

Lead plaintiff Ulbardo Fernandez alleged in his Rust-Oleum class action lawsuit that he purchased Restore at a Home Depot in September of 2013 intending to use it on the concrete floor in his garage and outside of his home after seeing an advertisement touting the product as a “smart alternative” to deck and concrete replacement.

According to the Rust-Oleum Restore class action lawsuit, the product indicated it was appropriate for use on wood decks and room-swept concrete. However, alleges Fernandez, the coating became damaged and came off of the concrete outside of his home in December and came off the floor in his garage in late February and early March of the following year.

Fernandez alleges that in August he returned to Home Depot to buy more Rust-Oleum Restore to repair the damage. He learned that the product had been pulled from Home Depot shelves and was sent back to Rust-Oleum, according to the defective deck coating class action lawsuit. The plaintiff claims he was also told by a Home Depot employee he should strip the Restore from the concrete and that many other customers had lodged similar complaints about the Rust-Oleum Restore product.

Fernandez alleges in the Rust-Oleum class action lawsuit that the materials used to market Restore “were false and misleading by virtue of the fact that the Restore product … was materially defective and incapable of adhering to wooden or broom swept concrete surfaces without peeling, cracking or otherwise becoming dislodged after its application.”

“By virtue of Restore’s material defect at the time of plaintiff’s purchases and the false, misleading and incomplete representations, depictions and instructions on the Restore buckets’ packaging labels, the defendants breached the implied warranty of Restore’s fitness for the particular purposes for which plaintiff requires Restore,” Fernandez argues in the Rust-Oleum Restore class action lawsuit.

Fernandez alleges that Restore is defective because it is prone to peeling and cracking. He accuses Home Depot and Rust-Oleum of falsely marketing the product as adhering to surfaces as a protective coating. The Rust-Oleum Restore class action lawsuit proposes to certify a Class of all people who purchased Restore in New York retail stores, with a subclass of people who purchased Restore at Home Depot locations. The claims against Home Depot and Rust-Oleum include breaches of express and implied warranty and violation of New York business law. Fernandez is seeking damages to cover the costs of the Restore product, costs of labor to apply the Restore, and the projected costs of removing the product.

Fernandez is represented by Kevin D. Bloom of Bloom & Bloom PC and Robert N. Isseks.

The Rust-Oleum Restore Class Action Lawsuit is Fernandez v. Rust-Oleum Corporation, et al., Case No. 7:14-cv-08857, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

UPDATE July 25, 2016: Attorneys for both sides tell the judge that a class action settlement is not far off in a set of consolidated Rust-Oleum lawsuits.

UPDATE 2: On Oct. 19, 2016, Rust-Oleum reached a proposed $9.3 million settlement with consumers who claim the company’s wood and concrete resurfacing product line, Restore, did not perform as advertised.

UPDATE 3: The Rust-Oleum Restore products class action settlement website has been established. Click here for more information and to sign-up for notifications.