Suave Naturals Class Action Says Shampoos Are Anything but ‘Natural’

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.

A quick look at the ingredient lists on Suave Naturals products reveals they’re not “natural” at all, according to a false advertising class action lawsuit.

Plaintiff Craig Hain is taking on defendant Conopco Inc., which does business under the name Unilever. He says Unilever’s Suave Naturals line of personal products is falsely labeled and over-promoted to deceive consumers into thinking they contain all-natural ingredients, when in fact they include ingredients that can’t reasonably be considered natural.

“Conopco engaged, and continues to engage, in a widespread, uniform marketing campaign using the Product packaging to mislead consumers about the nature, quality, and/or ingredients in Suave Naturals,” Hain claims.

Among the allegedly synthetic ingredients in these Suave Naturals products are sodium laureth sulfate, ammonium chloride, tetrasodium EDTA, methylisothiazolinone, and methylchloroisothiazolinone, according to the lawsuit.

“These synthetic ingredients are not mere trace ingredients within the Products,” Hain claims. “After water, synthetic ingredients comprise the overwhelming majority of the Products’ composition.”

Despite the presence of these allegedly synthetic ingredients, Hain claims, the labeling for Suave Naturals is designed to deceive consumers into expecting an all-natural product. He takes issue with the overall nature of the labeling on Suave Naturals products, not just the use of the word “Naturals.”

That labeling includes assertions that the products are “infused with” certain natural-sounding ingredients, most of which are plant products like lavender and coconut extract. The labeling uses other language like “Rainforest Fresh,” “Waterfall Mist” and “Everlasting Sunshine” that evokes images of natural scenes.

The labels at issue also display colorful images of flowers, fruits, nuts, and other botanical products. Hain includes several copies of these images as attachments to his Suave Naturals class action lawsuit.

Hain argues that by emphasizing the ideas of natural ingredients, this labeling helps distract consumers from the allegedly synthetic ingredients contained in Suave Naturals products.

As a result, Unilever fails to deliver the product that consumers have reasonably been led to expect. He alleges that each proposed Class Member has been economically harmed by paying a premium for a product that is actually worth significantly less.

Hain lists 42 different shampoos, conditioners, lotions and body washes, all sold under the Suave Naturals brand. More Suave Naturals products could be implicated, Hain says, depending on what evidence reveals in the course of discovery.

This Suave Naturals false advertising class action lawsuit raises claims for fraud, breach of warranty, and violation of California and New York consumer protection statutes.

Hain seeks to represent a nationwide plaintiff Class that would include all persons who purchased Suave Naturals products within the applicable statutory limitations period. He also proposes two subclasses consisting of Class Members from California and New York.

He seeks an award of compensatory and punitive damages, restitution and disgorgement, and reimbursement of court costs and attorneys’ fees. He also seeks a court injunction barring Unilever from continuing the allegedly deceptive advertising at issue here.

Hain’s attorneys are Yeremey O. Krivoshey, L. Timothy Fisher, Joel D. Smith, Thomas A. Reyda and Scott A. Bursor of Bursor & Fisher PA.

The Suave Naturals False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Craig Hain v. Conopco Inc., Case No. 2:17-cv-03656, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.