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.
A recent Germ-X class action claims that hand sanitizer can’t protect consumers from the coronavirus, although that message is implied by the manufacturer.
With the mounting threat of coronavirus spreading across the United States, millions of consumers have flooded their local stores in search of supplies.
News coverage details local stores wiped clean of face masks, cleaning wipes, and, most frequently, hand sanitizer.
Unfortunately, consumers may have been duped into purchasing hand sanitizer according to the Germ-X class action.
Did you purchase Germ-X hand sanitizer believing the product helps prevent the coronavirus? Get legal help by clicking here.
Plaintiffs Geraldine David, Susan Lara and Theresa Haas claim that they were deceived by Germ-X marketing that the products can reduce the chance of infection from the flu and other viruses – including the coronavirus.
The plaintiffs point to a recent letter from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) which warned Purell that their alcohol-based hand sanitizer was misrepresented as being able to prevent viruses, such as the flu. According to the FDA, there are no “adequate and well-controlled studies” which prove these representations.
According to the class action, Purell and Germ-X are “nearly identical.” Both products reportedly use ethyl alcohol in high concentrations between 60 and 70 percent. Based on this, the plaintiffs claim that the FDA’s warning letter to Purell could also apply to Germ-X. In fact, the FDA reportedly expanded on this idea in their warning letter, noting “we are not aware of a similar [over the counter] product as formulated and labeled,” which is supported by evidence that it can prevent a viral infection.
Despite the lack of evidence, plaintiffs claim that “Germ-X has represented in advertisements, various social media and on its website and other retail websites, that its product prevents the flu and other virus.” More recently, Germ-X advertisements have reportedly taken advantage of the coronavirus scare – claiming on Walmart.com that the products provide “Coronavirus/Flu Prevention.”
“Defendant misleads consumers into believing its products can prevent disease or infection from pathogens such as coronavirus and flu along with other claims that go beyond the general intended use of a topical alcohol-based hand sanitizer,” the Germ-X class action lawsuit claims.
Misrepresentations about the products allegedly caused consumers, such as the plaintiffs, to purchase Germ-X hand sanitizer. The Germ-X class action claims that these advertisements, which take advantage of consumer fear, caused financial injury to the plaintiffs because they were deceived into purchasing the products or paying more than they otherwise would have.
The plaintiffs seek to represent a Class of consumers from California who purchased Germ-X hand sanitizer products within the last four years.
On behalf of themselves and the proposed Class, the consumers aim to collect disgorgement, restitution, interest, injunctive relief, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.
Plaintiffs and the proposed Class are represented by Abbas Kazerounian of Kazerouni Law Group APC.
The Germ-X Coronavirus Class Action Lawsuit is David, et al. v. Vi-Jon Inc. d/b/a Germ-X, Case No. 3:20-cv-99999, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.
Join a Free Coronavirus Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
If you believe your rights were violated in a way that is directly related to the coronavirus pandemic, you may qualify to join this coronavirus class action lawsuit investigation.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
1,520 thoughts onGerm-X Class Action Says Sanitizer Doesn’t Prevent Coronavirus
Add me
add me
Please add me, I purchased a super large bottle – but am hoping it works as a disinfectant? Or not?
This is stupid, everyone knows nothing is 100% guarnteed…. used properly and with other measures it can help prevent…. but it doesn’t mean guarntee… You all fighting to get the easy dollar is going to make life miserable for the rest of us because now we have all these manufacturers of handsanitizer jumping on the bandwagon that are not making hand sanitizer safely ….. Its like the person who sued McDonalds when they spilled hot coffee in their lap and got burned…. what did they think they bought…. cold coffee….
People trying to make an easy buck off the system….
Woman from McDonald’s is a lie-
That woman got 3rd degree burns and needed skin graphs. She was never made whole with medical bills, which was all the suit was for. (She also may have been like 72.) She got death threats. She never saw any money the way you say.
Look up the actual story. It’s an easy find, and really sad.
I’m pretty sure that there are products that are said to kill it because we tested it on the virus period So when you buy something and you assume that it’s going to work because of what has been said then yes it’s a lie and people could have died and maybe did die
Add
I bought one bottle. Please add me.
Please add me
This case was voluntarily dismissed. Plaintiffs must not have had the case they thought they did.
Add me to list
add me please