An Illinois couple claims the LeafFilter gutter system is defective and actually left them with more work to do to ensure their gutters worked properly.
According to lead plaintiffs James and Geraldine Zilinsky, the LeafFilter gutter system is advertised as a time- and labor-saving device that will spare homeowners the hassle of traditional gutter cleaning. In fact, the couple says they and other consumers paid a premium for the product based on these marketing claims.
However, they soon discovered the product suffered from defects that made it more difficult for their gutters to function. In addition, the LeafFilter’s defects resulted in damage to their property.
“LeafFilter possesses a latent defect that prevents substantial amounts of rainwater from passing through the LeafFilter system and instead causes (1) rainwater to flow over the top of the LeafFilter system and damage Plaintiffs’ and class members’ homes, foundations, landscaping, sidewalks, and fascia; and (2) debris to accumulate on top of the LeafFilter system that must be cleaned off by the homeowner,” the class action lawsuit alleges.
LeafFilter is advertised as a gutter guard, according to the class action lawsuit, that purportedly prevents leaves and other debris from entering a home’s gutter, saving homeowners from the task of gutter cleaning. The product is touted as protecting a home’s gutters from all types of debris, including leaves, pine needles and even grit from shingles, the complaint states.
The Zalinskys say they fell for advertising by the manufacturer LeafFilter North, in early 2020 and paid more than $3,000 to have the product installed in their home; however, the plaintiffs say, they noticed water washed over the system during heavy rainfall within a month of having the system in place. They claim that prior to calling to notify the company about the rainfall overflow issue, they were never informed that the LeafFilter would not work during heavy rain.
According to the complaint, LeafFilter recommended lowering their gutters to solve the problem. The Zalinskys said they hired another contractor to evaluate whether the gutters could be lowered on their home and were told emphatically not to lower the gutters. Instead, the couple alleges, they paid nearly $400 to have the LeafFilter removed and it is now sitting in their garage.
“Had Defendant disclosed the defect, Plaintiffs and class members would have negotiated a lower price to reflect the risk and defect or simply avoided the risk and defect altogether by not purchasing LeafFilter,” the complaint states.
The class action lawsuit claims LeafFilter North has known of problems with its product for years but still advertises the product to consumers. The plaintiffs say LeafFilter North actively conceals the defective nature of the LeafFilter from consumers.
The complaint points out that many consumers have filed complaints with the Better Business Bureau (BBB) about LeafFilter, along with notifying their attorney general’s office.
According to the class action lawsuit, the filter on the LeafFilter gutter system is too fine. It clogs up, the complaints say, and needs more cleaning than the regular gutters ever did. Online complaints also describe water pour off homes with LeafFilter installed, causing mold and other damage.
The plaintiffs contend LeafFilter North not only fails to disclose its defective product in its marketing materials, it makes an effort to scrub the internet of consumer complaints.
According to the class action lawsuit, “once consumers complain about the LeafFilter defect, Defendant enters into confidential settlement agreements with consumers, which requires the consumer to promise not to disparage/ further disparage the LeafFilter system through online message or complaint boards such as the BBB, yelp, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, and other consumer information websites and social media platforms, as a condition of removal and refund.”
In addition, the plaintiffs say LeafFilter North falsely advertises its warranty.
Allegedly, the so-called limited lifetime warranty is “specifically crafted” to only cover internal clogs in the gutter system; however, the plaintiffs point out the problem comes from debris on top of the LeafFilter that does not allow water to enter into the gutter.
The class action lawsuit seeks to represent a nationwide Class of consumers who purchased a LeafFilter gutter system, as well as Ohio and Illinois subclasses. The plaintiffs accuse LeafFilter North of violating state consumer protection lawsuit, of fraud and of unjust enrichment.
Have you had a LeafFilter gutter system installed? We want to hear from you! Tell us about your experience in the comment section below.
The lead plaintiffs James and Geraldine Zilinsky and the proposed Class Members are represented by Jeffrey S. Goldenberg and Todd B. Naylor of Goldenberg Schneider LPA; and Janet R. Varnell, Matthew Peterson and Brian Warwick of Varnell & Warwick.
The LeafFilter Defect Class Action Lawsuit is Zilinsky v. LeafFilter North LLC, Case No. 2:20-cv-6229, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division.
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
480 thoughts onLeafFilter Gutter System Defective, Class Action Lawsuit Says
Is this lawsuit ongoing? I sure hope so. We had LeafFilter installed in summer 2024 for $3000 and it has NEVER WORKED!
I have emailed them and called; they have sent out 2 different men. The first told us “they” would need to cut our metal roof back (voiding the roof warranty) to get the filter to work and stop it from overrunning the gutter, eating away at our foundation. The 2nd most recent man (this month) suggested we sue them!!! I have taken extensive notes on what they have told us and NONE of it is true. Please contact me about this lawsuit. We wish to join it!