A new proposed class action lawsuit filed by a Florida woman alleges that Hollywood stylist Chaz Dean’s WEN hair care line essentially destroyed her hair.

Plaintiff Waverly Robinson purchased the WEN hair products, specifically the cleansing conditioner, and claims that she suffered serious side effects including significant hair loss, dryness, thinning hair, and an irritated, itchy scalp.

Robinson’s proposed class action lawsuit follows on the heels of an ongoing massive litigation movement filed in California federal court with similar accusations against the hair care product maker and its parent company, Guthy-Renker.

However, Robinson’s WEN class action lawsuit accuses not only Dean and Guthy-Renker, but also names WEN marketer and seller QVC as a defendant.

“Plaintiff, and all other similarly situated consumers, did not bargain for Products that cause adverse effects in exchange for their payment of the purchase price,” the Wen class action lawsuit states. “Plaintiff contends that the Products do not work as impliedly warranted and as a result, mislead consumers into purchasing the Products under misleading circumstances.”

Robinson seeks to represent a class of women who also suffered severe hair loss and related side effects as a result of using WEN hair products. She is seeking an unspecified amount damages, full restitution and a “disgorgement of all ill-gotten gains” through multiple claims against WEN of negligent misrepresentation and violations of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.

About WEN Hair Care Products

WEN by Chaz Dean hair care products are heavily promoted during late night, early morning infomercials and on QVC as a natural alternative to shampoo and other hair care products.

On its website, it says it’s different from any other hair care product in that it “cleanses and conditions the hair simultaneously.”

“The cleansers include a perfect blend of special ingredients, including natural botanicals and herbs, and do not contain sodium laurel sulfate or harsh chemicals,” according to the Wen website.

Overview of WEN Hair Products Litigation

Several lawsuits have been filed throughout the country by women who suffered hair damage or loss as a result of using WEN hair products.

In a California federal court, over 200 women have joined together across 40 states in a class action lawsuit that similarly alleges that WEN hair products caused severe hair loss. While this Wen class action lawsuit doesn’t include QVC as a named defendant, many of the allegations reported in Robinson’s putative class action are identical in nature.

According to this class action lawsuit, WEN’s sulfate-free hair products contain an ingredient that “causes a chemical reaction and damages hair and follicles,” resulting in baldness, rashes, scalp irritation, hair breakage, and hair discoloration.

The lead plaintiff in this case says she loss “one quarter to one third” of her hair and had to spend money on hair extensions to hide the baldness reportedly caused by WEN hair products.

Another WEN class action lawsuit filed in Texas last April by six women claims that WEN hair products caused clumps of hair to fall out, which haven’t grown back.  The plaintiffs in this Wen class action lawsuit claim they relied on celebrity endorsements like those from Brooke Shields and Alyssa Milano who all tout the hair care line as a miracle for their hair.

Instead, after using WEN hair products, the results were nothing like the promises made on the advertisements for the cleansing conditioner and other hair care products. The women also similarly report that WEN hair products permanently damaged their hair.

If you or someone you know purchased and used WEN hair products and suffered irreparable hair damage or loss, you may be entitled to compensation.  An experienced product liability attorney can review your case at no charge and advise you if filing a WEN lawsuit or joining a WEN class action lawsuit is right for you.

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely on advertisements.