Class Action Lawsuit Says Olay Regenerist Doesn’t Work as Advertised

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.

In 2012, Lorette Perez-Pirio of Ohio sued the cosmetic manufacturer Procter & Gamble Co. for false advertising, accusing the company of making false claims on its ‘Olay Regenerist’ line of beauty products.

According to the false advertising lawsuit, after she allegedly received no results from the Olay Regenerist products, Perez-Pirio sent a letter to P&G in June 2011. In her letter, she explained her concerns that the products deceived consumers about their effectiveness and demanded compensation. Her lawsuit seeks to strip the products of their false labeling, and hopes to enforce accurate information to be available to the public.

Perez-Pirio brought a class action lawsuit against P&G, stating that the company had only claimed the Olay Regenerist lines were effective to earn massive profit.  This case was brought to Los Angeles Supreme Court, where Perez-Pirio brought allegations of false advertisement and misrepresenting their entire line of self-proclaimed anti-aging Olay skin creams.

The advertisements in question claim that these creams “regenerate the skin around the eye such that puffiness, dark circles, fine lines, wrinkles and other signs of aging are immediately reduced.” The products that have gained the most attention in this case are the Olay Regenerist Advanced Anti-Aging Products. Perez-Pirio states that despite the company’s promises, she experienced no change after using the creams.

Perez-Pirio claims that P&G was fully aware that its products did not work as advertised at the time of her purchase. She accuses P&G of false advertising and concealing information.

Overview of Anti-Aging False Advertising Allegations

According to most marketing experts, the most lucrative cosmetic craze at the moment involves anti-aging creams. Other products to hide aging exist, but the most recent litigation focuses on facial rejuvenation products. Some of these anti-aging products claim to somehow control the or slow the aging process through DNA technology, or that they have the ability to bring out the natural layering or complexion of the skin. Most medical experts have found these claims to be false and baseless. Additionally, thousands of men and women across the nation have filed lawsuits that allege these companies falsely advertised their products as something they were not.

Much like P&G in this case, the recent litigation movement against these companies center around the aggressive advertisements they campaign to the public. While each company uses different gimmicks and slogans, they all seem to convey the following message to their customers: aging is merely skin deep. By citing false scientific evidence and claims that their products are made with the science of rejuvenation technology, they give the promise of a cheaper and safer alternative to Botox and plastic surgery.

The Olay Regenerist False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Lorette Perez-Pirio v. the Procter & Gamble Co., Case No. BC485201, in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles.

Join a Free Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you believe that you or a loved one have been the victim of an anti-aging cream false advertising scam, you have legal options. Please visit the Anti-Aging Skin Care Product Class Action Lawsuit Investigation. There, you can submit your claim for a free legal review and if it qualifies for legal action, a seasoned anti-aging lawyer will contact you for a free, no-obligation consultation. You will be guided through the litigation process at no out-of-pocket expenses or hidden fees. The anti-aging skin product attorneys working this investigation do not get paid until you do.