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.
Tom’s of Maine anti-plaque toothpaste class action overview:
- Who: A toothpaste consumer is suing Tom’s of Maine.
- Why: The plaintiff alleges the company makes toothpaste that falsely purports to prevent plaque.
- Where: The Tom’s of Maine antiplaque class action was filed in a New York federal court.
Tom’s of Maine makes a fluoride-free toothpaste it claims is anti-plaque and whitening — however, the toothpaste does not control or prevent plaque, a new class action lawsuit alleges.
Plaintiff Patrick Fish filed the class action lawsuit against Tom’s of Maine Inc. on Jan. 27 in a New York federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws.
According to the lawsuit, Tom’s manufactures and labels toothpaste promoted as “Fluoride-Free” and “Antiplaque & Whitening” under its own brand. When consumers see the products’ representations, they will expect it to be effective at preventing and reducing gingivitis, the lawsuit states.
“However, the representation is misleading because the Product lacks ingredients sufficient to control, reduce, prevent, or remove plaque that leads to gingivitis.”
Tom’s toothpaste does not contain ingredients capable of preventing plaque, lawsuit alleges
Though the toothpaste contains calcium carbonate, hydrated silica and sodium bicarbonate, these “abrasive” ingredients are not capable of reducing plaque to prevent or control gingivitis, the lawsuit states.
“By promoting the Product as ‘Fluoride Free’ and ‘Antiplaque,’ consumers like Plaintiff expected it to contain non-fluoride ingredients whose effect on plaque would significantly control and prevent gingivitis,” it says.
Fish alleges that, while sodium bicarbonate has been shown to exert an antibacterial action, it was only in high dosages and with extended exposure time, “circumstances different from someone brushing their teeth.”
The plaintiff claims sodium lauryl sulfate, an anionic surfactant, is not capable of reducing plaque in a therapeutically significant way, either. As a result of the alleged false and misleading representations, the toothpaste is sold at a premium price of no less than $6.99 for 5.5 ounces, excluding tax and sales, Fish says.
He seeks to represent a New York class of consumers who bought the product, plus a consumer fraud multistate class of consumers from Texas, South Dakota, Wyoming, Idaho, Alaska, Iowa, Mississippi, West Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Utah.
Fish is suing for violations of state consumer laws, breach of warranty, fraud and unjust enrichment; he also seeks certification of the class action, as well as damages, fees, costs and a jury trial.
Last year, Tom’s of Maine was hit with a class action lawsuit alleging it intentionally mislabels that its toothpaste products are natural when they contain synthetic ingredients.
What do you think of the allegations in this lawsuit against Tom’s of Maine? Let us know in the comments.
He is represented by Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan & Associates PC.
The Tom’s of Maine class action lawsuit is Patrick Fish, et al. v. Tom’s of Maine Inc., Case No. 6:23-cv-00110-DNH-TWD, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
24 thoughts onTom’s of Maine class action claims company falsely advertises fluoride-free, anti-plaque toothpaste benefits
I purchase Tom’s all the time. I will not be adding my name however. I still feel it is a much better alternative to the main-stream pastes that are full of fluoride and other crap.
Add
please add me