Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
Pantene Pro-V products are misrepresented as “natural,” according to a recent class action lawsuit against Procter & Gamble.
Plaintiff Sean McGinity says that he purchased Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion shampoo and conditioner products in June 2019 based on representations that the products were from “nature.” Based on this understanding, McGinity was allegedly willing to pay a higher price for the products.
However, the products are reportedly not worth the premium price point because they contain “nonnatural and synthetic ingredients, harsh and potentially harmful ingredients, and are substantially unnatural.”
Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion products reportedly contain numerous synthetic ingredients such as synthetic fragrance, dyes, surfactants, and preservatives. Some of the ingredients, including the synthetic dyes, are reportedly produced from unnatural sources such as petroleum or coal tar. Based on these ingredients, McGinity argues that the personal care products cannot and should not be marketed as natural.
In fact, the Natural Products Association reportedly refuses to certify products as “natural” if they contain any of the following ingredients: cocamide MEA, behentrimonium methosulfate, cocamidopropyl betaine, dimethicone or dimethiconol, disodium EDTA, methylisothiazolinone, or sodium laureth sulfate. All of these unnatural ingredients are reportedly found in Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion products.
“Reasonable consumers, including Plaintiff, purchased the Products based upon their belief that they are natural,” McGinity contends in his Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion class action lawsuit.
“However, a reasonable consumer would not deem the Products natural if he/she knew that they contained synthetic, highly processed and/or non-natural ingredients.”
Despite these unnatural ingredients, Pantene Pro-V products are allegedly marketed with “nature” representations. McGinity argues that “nature” statements are reasonably understood by consumers to mean that the products contain “natural” ingredients.
McGinity notes that misrepresentations about the product’s “natural” ingredients had a significant impact on consumer purchasing decisions. In fact, a recent consumer survey reportedly found that more than 75% of consumers were deceived by Pantene Pro-V representations that the products contained natural ingredients despite these representations being false.
Allegedly, Procter & Gamble knows that consumers will be misled by their product representations and intentionally markets their Nature Fusion line in a deceptive way.
“Defendant’s claims pertaining to the natural qualities of the Products are false, misleading, designed to deceive consumers into paying a price premium for the Products, and designed to mislead reasonable consumers into selecting Defendant’s Products over other competing [personal care products],” the Pantene Pro-V class action lawsuit contends.
McGinity says that he and other consumers were financially injured by this misleading representations because they were deceived into paying a higher price for the products than they otherwise would have.
In some cases, consumers would have allegedly not purchased the products at all if they had known the truth.
The plaintiff seeks to represent a Class of Californians who purchased Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion products since June 5, 2016.
Although the exact number of Class Members is unknown, McGinity argues that there could be thousands of consumers included in the proposed Class.
On behalf of himself and the proposed Class, McGinity seeks restitution, disgorgement, compensatory damages, punitive damages, interest, court costs, and attorneys’ fees. He also seeks injunctive relief requiring Procter & Gamble to cease their deceptive marketing.
Did you purchase Pantene Pro-V products? Did you think the products were natural? Share your experiences in the comment section below.
McGinity and the proposed Class Members are represented by Michael R. Reese, Sue J. Nam, and George V. Granade of Reese LLP and Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan & Associates.
The Pantene Pro-V Nature Fusion Class Action Lawsuit is Sean McGinity v. The Procter & Gamble Company, Case No. 4:20-cv-08164-KAW, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
1,123 thoughts onPantene Pro-V Products Shouldn’t Be Labeled as ‘Natural’ Claims Class Action Lawsuit
Please add my name I have used this product for a long time.
I have been using Pantene Natural Fusion thinking it was “Natural”. Please add me.