Peter Thomas Roth Class Action Says Anti-Aging Claims Are False

A class action lawsuit says that Peter Thomas Roth makes false anti-aging claims about two of its product lines— the Rose Stem Gel products and the Water Drench line of products. 

Plaintiffs Angela Clair, Bonnie McDonald, and Miley-Isabella Oien say they purchased products from the two lines in question, believing the claims made by Peter Thomas Roth about the capability of the products.

The Peter Thomas Roth class action claims that the skincare company falsely advertises that the line of “Rose Stem Cell” products can improve and repair human skin because of the presence of rose stem cells in them.

However, the customers argue that these claims are false. They say that the company relies on consumers’ knowledge of the transformative and healing power of human stem cells to imply that rose stem cells could provide customers with anti-aging and restorative benefits.

The Peter Thomas Roth class action lawsuit notes that the company also repeatedly uses the term “Bio-Repair” to trick customers into thinking that the products can repair their skin, though the customers say they cannot.

The skincare class action lawsuit also claims that the “Water Drench” line of products is misrepresented. According to the customers, Peter Thomas Roth alleges that the presence of hyaluronic acid in the products will “draw moisture from the atmosphere into the user’s skin.” Peter Thomas Roth claims that the product will hold 1,000 times its weight in water and provide hydration for up to 72 hours.

The Peter Thomas Roth class action lawsuit asserts that the company uses scientific terms like “hyaluronic acid” to mislead customers into thinking that the product is effective, when it really does not provide the advertised benefits.

The customers note that Peter Thomas Roth differentiates itself from competitors by making claims that their skincare uses cutting edge technology that brings significant benefits to consumers. However, the plaintiffs argue that these claims are “demonstrably false” and used to trick customers into making purchases that they might not otherwise have made.

The Peter Thomas Roth class action states that the defendant markets itself as a “prestige” brand and therefore can charge higher prices than other brands. Allegedly, this reputation builds trust with consumers, and leads them to be willing to spend a large amount of money for the products and their associated, advertised benefits. 

The customers say that Peter Thomas Roth knowingly misrepresents its products to entice customers into purchasing them. This allegedly causes customers financial injury.

Clair, McDonald, and Oien seek damages on behalf of themselves and all other similarly affected consumers.

Have you purchased Peter Thomas Roth products? What was your experience?

The customers are represented by Stephen M. Raab of Gutride Safier LLP.

The Peter Thomas Roth Skincare Class Action Lawsuit is Angela Clair, et al. v. Peter Thomas Roth LLC, et al. Case No. 1:20-cv-01220, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Starbucks Class Action Says Venti Drinks Need More Caffeine

Does Regions Bank Do FHA Loans?

Arizona Beverage Class Action Says Fruit Snacks Aren’t ‘All Natural’

How Do You Know if Lung Cancer Is Caused by Asbestos?