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.
PetSafe shock collars lawsuit overview:
- Who: A dog owner is suing Radio Systems, the manufacturer of PetSafe shock collars.
- Why: The plaintiff says the company falsely markets the collars as safe and harmless to use on animals, when they in fact harm pets.
- Where: The PetSafe shock collar lawsuit was filed in a California federal court.
Radio Systems markets its PetSafe shock collars as being safe and harmless, when they actually harm pets physically and psychologically, a new class action lawsuit alleges.
Plaintiff Steven Hernandez filed the class action complaint against Radio Systems Corporation Oct. 21 in a California federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws.
According to the lawsuit, Radio Systems makes PetSafe shock collars and markets them as being “safe” and “harmless”. The shock collars deliver electric shocks to pets via a collar worn around their necks.
“In fact, the use of electric shocks is gravely dangerous to the pets’ physical and psychological well-being,” the lawsuit states.
In Hernandez’ case, he says he used the collar on his dog until he noticed a sticky residue and foul smell coming from his dog’s neck.
“He removed the Shock Collar from his dog and saw that a patch of fur was missing from his dog’s neck,” the lawsuit states. “His veterinarian identified holes in his dog’s neck that coincided with the placement of the inserts in the Shock Collar Product.”
Radio Systems used misleading language to conceal reality of shock collars, lawsuit alleges
To conceal the true nature of the shock collars, Radio Systems uses euphemisms to describe what being electrocuted by a shock collar feels like for a pet, the lawsuit states.
Among the most popular terms that it uses to falsely describe a painful electric shock are “static correction,” “surprise,” “tickle,” and “stimulation,” it says.
On the product’s packaging and website, Radio Systems prominently displays false claims that the collars have been scientifically proven safe, and are recommended by veterinarians and professional dog trainers, the lawsuit states.
Instead, there are hundreds of documented cases that reveal the use of shock collars can cause pets severe injuries, including skin ruptures, bruising, inflammations, burns and infections, the lawsuit states.
The shock collars also lead to psychological stress, anxiety, and depression caused by the repeated painful shocks, the lawsuit states.
The plaintiff is looking to represent anyone who purchased a collar in California.
He’s suing under California consumer and business laws and seeking certification of the class action, an order preventing Radio Systems from labeling the products as safe, financial restitution, fees, costs and a jury trial.
In September, Bayer was hit with a class action lawsuit alleging it continues to market that its Seresto flea and tick collars are safe for pets even after tens of thousands of pet injuries and more than a thousand deaths.
Do you have a PetSafe shock collar? Let us know what you think of these allegations in the comments!
The plaintiff is represented by Amber L. Schubert, Robert C. Schubert and Willem F. Jonckheer of Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP.
The Radio Systems class action lawsuit is Steven Hernandez v. Radio Systems Corporation, Case No. 5:22-cv-01861 in the U.S. District Court Central District of California Eastern Division.
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:
28 thoughts onPetSafe shock collars falsely advertised as ‘harmless,’ class action claims
I have pics of burns on my dogs necks from these collars! Please add me!
I used Petsafe on my dogs for years until I discovered the missing hair and the way they acted. I thought I was protecting them when in reality I was inadvertently harming my babies. I will never use one again!
I have a petsafe collar for my 11 pound dog which in my opinion could be dangerous. I only use it for training purposes (barking) and it works! Now I just show him the collar and he wont bark. Waring a shock collar for long periods of time in my opinion will cause physical and mental issues.
All you’re doing is causing pain. Your dog is scared. Thats not training. It would be the same as beating your kid if they draw on the walls. Of course they won’t do it again because they’re scared. Fear-based training has been proven to not be effective and cause a lot of behaviour problems.
Innotek was bought out by PetSafe. I have had the Innotek rechargeable invisable , in ground system for 3 dogs for 17 years on 3 acres of land. I did not have any burns , hair missing on any of my dogs. Or notice any behavior issues other than them knowing their boundaries.
But we had to replace some rechargeable batteries over time. But one day one of the batteries malfunctioned an it was continuing to shock my 2 year old Rottweiler. We quickly took it off her an we’ve never used the invisible fence since. It was a terrible disfunction of the battery . And we just would not risk it happening again causing our girl pain an possible injury.
I’ve got pictures of the burn marks on my dogs necks!!!! Add me PLEASE!!!!
Purchased two of these for my Coonhound. She reacted pretty violently when using it on the lowest setting. Bucking and trying to get the collar off. This is the first I’ve seen of this suit but I can believe it. My eldest son wanted to see what the “buzz” was about and he tested it on his hand on a very low setting. Needless to say the collar went one way and the remote the other way. His comment? “This is just cruel”