Brita class action alleges company overstates water filtration abilities

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.

Brita water filtration class action lawsuit overview: 

• Who: Nicholas Brown filed a class action lawsuit against Brita Products Co. 
• Why: Brown claims Brita misleads consumers about the ability of its water filtration devices to remove or reduce common drinking water contaminants. 
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court. 

Brita Products Co. sells certain Brita brand water pitchers, dispensers, and filters that are “not nearly as effective” as the company “deliberately” leads consumers to believe, a new class action lawsuit alleges. 

Plaintiff Nicholas Brown claims Brita takes advantage of consumers and families’ “basic and fundamental need for clean and safe drinking water” by allegedly misleading them to believe certain of their products will remove “common hazardous contaminants.” 

Brown argues Brita’s allegedly deceptive and misleading marketing tactics caused consumers to collectively overpay by millions of dollars and “forego more effective alternatives.” 

“Defendant has not only bilked millions of dollars from consumers in ill gotten gains, but Defendant has put the health and welfare of millions of consumers and their families at risk,” the Brita class action states. 

Brown wants to represent a nationwide class of consumers who have purchased certain Brita brand water pitchers, dispensers and filters within the applicable statute of limitations period and a California subclass of consumers who have done so within the past four years. 

Brita misleads consumers into believing products can remove, reduce common contaminants, class action alleges

Brown argues Brita misleads reasonable consumers into believing certain products can remove or “reduce below lab detection limits” common contaminants — including arsenic, radium and nitrate and nitrites, among other things — from drinking water. 

“Defendant … fails to state, expressly, clearly, and conspicuously on the Products’ packaging and labels that the Products will not remove or reduce contaminants hazardous to health,” the Brita class action states. 

Brown claims Brita is guilty of unjust enrichment and breach of warranty, and of violating California’s False Advertising Law, Consumers Legal Remedies Act and Unfair Competition Law. 

The plaintiff is demanding a jury trial and requesting declaratory and injunctive relief, along with an award of monetary and punitive damages for himself and all class members. 

A separate lawsuit involving Brita was filed last year by water filter startup Zero Technologies over claims Clorox filed an early patent application and created a monopoly for its Brita water filter. 

Have you purchased a Brita water filtration product? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Ryan J. Clarkson, Katherine A. Bruce, Kelsey J. Elling and Olivia Treister of Clarkson Law Firm PC. 

The Brita water filtration class action lawsuit is Brown v. The Brita Products Co., Case No. 23STCV19534, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Gree announces recall for 1.5M+ dehumidifiers due to fire, burn risk
• Mattress company class actions allege companies use fake sales to drive profits
• Walmart class action claims Hotel Style sheets falsely advertise thread count 
• Colgate class action claims company falsely advertises recyclable toothpaste tubes