Chifles Plantain Chips Class Action Says Packages are Underfilled

A class action lawsuit, recently filed in a California federal court, alleges that Chifles Plantain Chips come in underfilled bags meant to deceive consumers.

In her Chifles Plantain Chips class action, plaintiff Dallas Pottish alleges that Chifles Plantain Chips are packaged in bags which contain excessive slack-fill of nearly 40 percent empty space.

Pottish claims that this is deceptive marketing on the part of defendant Plantain Products Company which is meant to deceive consumers into thinking they are getting more product.

Almost every chip bag contains empty space, commonly referred to as “slack-fill.” Some slack-fill is functional and meets safe-harbor provisions. These provisions include: protection of package contents, requirements or limitations of industrial filling machinery, product settling during shipping and handling, packaging performs a specific role in preparing or consuming product, and reusable packaging of significant value.

Nonfunctional slack-fill, as defined by the California Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (CFPLA), is empty space in packaging which does not fulfill a reasonable function. The Act states that “No food containers shall be made, formed, or filled as to be misleading. […] A container that does not allow the consumer to fully view its contents shall be considered to be filled as to be misleading if it contains nonfunctional slack fill.”

“Consumers, in reliance on the size of the containers, purchased the Chifles Plantain Chips products, which they would not have purchased had they known that the containers were substantially empty,” the Chifles Plantain Chips class action states.

Pottish’s plantain chips slack-fill class action references a study done by the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute of Marketing Science, which reportedly states that many consumers rely on the size of packaging to gauge how much product they are purchasing.

“Most of our studies show that 75 to 80 percent of consumers don’t even bother to look at any label information, no less the net weight […] Faced with a large box and a smaller box, both with the same amount of product inside […] consumers are apt to choose the larger box because they think it’s a better value.”

Pottish alleges that underfilling Chifles Plantain Chips bags is a deceptive business practice and in direct violation of the CFPLA.

According to the Chifles Plantain Chips class action, consumers rely on the size of packaging when deciding whether or not to purchase a product and reasonably assume that larger packaging means more product. The Chifles Plantain Chips class action claims that the manufacturers take advantage of these assumptions, leaving consumers with less product than they paid for.

Pottish seeks to represent a Class of California residents who purchased Chifles Plantain Chips with nonfunctional slack-fill. The Chifles Plantain Chips class action lawsuit seeks injunctive relief, restitution, compensatory damages, punitive damages, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

The plaintiff is represented by Scott J. Ferrell of Pacific Trial Attorneys.

The Chifles Plantain Chips Slack-Fill Class Action Lawsuit is Pottish v. Plantain Products Company, Case No. 8:18-cv-00904-FMO-JPR, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.