DAP Class Action Lawsuit Claims Clear Sealant Turns Yellow

A consumer has filed a class action lawsuit alleging DAP kitchen and bathroom sealant marketed as “crystal clear” turns yellow over time.

Plaintiff Brandon Ehlis claims the company has continued to market its DAP Clear Sealant as “crystal clear” despite years of feedback from customers who have reported the discoloration.

Ehlis says the purpose of the DAP Clear Sealant is to create watertight seals around kitchen and bathroom fixtures. Because this seal is often visible, color is a factor for consumers when choosing a sealant.

According to the DAP class action lawsuit, advertisements for DAP Clear Sealant claim the product is “formulated to stand the test of time” and is “clearer than silicone.”

Ehlis says he purchased DAP Clear Sealant specifically because of these claims.

However, the sealant yellowed several months after being applied, Ehlis claims. 

He now says he would not have purchased DAP Clear Sealant or would have paid less for it had he known about its potential future discoloration. 

In addition, the plaintiff says DAP has been aware of the discoloration issue since at least 2012.

“Consumer reviews of the product have consistently and frequently discussed the discoloration issue for nearly a decade,” the class action lawsuit says. “Furthermore, DAP representatives responded to many reviews concerning the product’s discoloration and requested customers provide additional information, indicating that DAP was on notice of the yellowing defect.”

For example, Ehlis’ class action lawsuit says, out of 32 reviews on the sealant’s product page on Home Depot’s website, only five were positive reviews and didn’t mention discoloration. The remaining were all one-star reviews that cited the discoloration.

The customer reviews describe the sealant’s eventual color as “amber,” “yellow,” “urine yellow” and “the most awful yellow color you’ve ever seen,” according to the class action lawsuit.

Rather than changing its marketing tactics or addressing the yellowing problem, the complaint says, “DAP instead diluted the negative reviews in an attempt to mislead consumers as to the color of DAP Clear Sealant.”

The plaintiff said DAP began a promotion in March 2018 in which the company would send individuals samples of DAP Clear Sealant in exchange for a review to be written shortly after receiving the product. This resulted in a “substantial number” of “uncharacteristically positive reviews” of the product in March and April of that year.

“In these two months alone, DAP collected 35 positive reviews — six times the previous number of positive reviews from the past eight years — that were written because of the promotion,” the class action lawsuit says. The reviews were disclosed as being related to the promotion.

Ehlis says because of DAP’s inaccurate advertising of the product as well as its plan to collect positive reviews, both sources provided false information regarding the DAP Clear Sealant and deliberately misled consumers.

DAP has allegedly refused to take action, so the plaintiff is asking the Court to order DAP to stop misrepresenting the sealant’s color and clarity.

Ehlis says he “remains in the market for sealants” and says he’s in danger of future harm because he is unable to know if or when DAP has stopped misrepresenting its clear sealant products.

The plaintiff alleges DAP has violated the Maryland Consumer Protection Act; Minnesota’s Prevention of Consumer Fraud Act, Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act and Unlawful Trade Practices Act; and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. He also accused the company of breach of express warranty and breach of implied warranty.

The proposed Class would include any person or entity in the U.S. who purchased DAP 3.0 Crystal Clear Kitchen, Bath and Plumbing Sealant for their own use between Aug. 31, 2014 and present.

The plaintiff demands a jury trial and is asking the Court for restitution of all charges paid due to DAP’s alleged deceptive business practices, as well as disgorgement and restitution “of all monies wrongfully obtained and retained” by DAP; for compensatory and actual damages; statutory damages and penalties; prejudgment interest; court costs and attorneys’ and expert fees; and any other relief the Court deems just.

Have you purchased DAP Clear Sealant? Did you notice it discoloring? Tell us about it in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Daniel E. Gustafson, Daniel C. Hedlund, David A. Goodwin and Kaitlyn L. Dennis of Gustafson Gluek PLLC, and Brian C. Gudmundson and Michael J. Laird of Zimmerman Reed LLP. 

The DAP Kitchen and Bathroom Sealant Class Action Lawsuit is Brandon Ehlis, et al. v. DAP Products Inc., Case No. 0:20-cv-01872, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

Lenovo Class Action Lawsuit Says Yoga Touchscreen Laptops Are Defective

House to Vote on Marijuana Decriminalization In September

Ethicon Surgical Staplers Recalled by Manufacturer

Car Dealership TCPA Violations: Text Message Spam, Robocalls, Cell Phone Calls & Prerecorded Messages