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.
Duracell Coppertop Duralock batteries are prone to leaking battery fluid during normal use, a recent deceptive marketing class act lawsuit claims.
Plaintiffs Lauren Carlson and Jamal Yusuf, both of Massachusetts, filed their Duracell class action lawsuit in a Massachusetts federal court on Nov. 19 against Duracell makers The Gillette Company and The Proctor & Gamble Company.
“Plaintiffs allege that Defendants concealed and misrepresented material facts concerning potential battery leakage during the intended use of their Duracell Batteries,” the explain in their Duracell Batteries class action lawsuit.
Duracell announced in a June 2012 press release that it would be launching batteries that came with “Duralock Power Preserve Technology.” These batteries would have a “Duralock ring” marked on them and would come with a ten year guarantee in storage, not while being used.
This 10 year guarantee was marked prominently on Duracell Coppertop packaging for AA and AAA size batteries.
The Duralock batteries were also part of an advertising campaign, which included both radio and television ads.
“On each of the Duracell Batteries, Defendants placed a date ten years in the future to affirmatively represent the date that the battery is guaranteed not to fail,” the Duracell Batteries class action lawsuit states.
“Nowhere on the packaging of the Duracell Batteries is the disclosure that the batteries may leak when used in a normal and expected manner,” it adds.
However, Carlson and Yusuf allege that they do “leak even when used in a normal and expected manner.”
They also allege that Gillette and Proctor & Gamble “conspicuously failed to disclose that the Duracell Batteries leak when not in use and the leakage can damage any device that the batteries are stored in.”
In addition, the “defendants’ glaring omission that the batteries can leak and ruin electronic devices would, and did, mislead reasonable consumers,” they allege.
According to Carlson and Yusuf, the Duracell makers “had knowledge of the problem of leakage in their AA and AAA sized batteries under normal conditions of use intended by Defendants.”
The Massachusetts’ plaintiffs claim that “numerous complaints” were “filed directly with defendants by showing dates throughout the class period showing a leakage problem.”
They further allege that Gillette and Proctor & Gamble relied on the fact that most consumers don’t put a lot of thought into their batteries and “withheld critical information in order to increase sales and/or their market share.”
The plaintiffs claim that they did rely on the advertising campaign when purchasing Duracell Batteries with the 10 year guarantee and “believed that the batteries purchased would not fail for ten years.”
They are proposing a class that includes “all purchasers in Massachusetts who bought Duracell Coppertop AA and AAA batteries with Duralock beginning June 1, 2012 throughout the date of notice.”
Carlson and Yusuf are charging the defendants with breach of implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose and unjust enrichment.
The plaintiffs are represented by Erica Mirabella of Mirabella Law, LLC, by Richard Barrett and Barrett J. Clisby of Barrett J. Clisby PLLC, by Dewitt Lovelace and Valierie Lauro Nettles of Lovelace and Associates, PA, by Charles Barret of Charles Barrett, PC, by Thomas Thrash of Thrash Law Firm, PA, Ben Pierce Gore of Pratt & Associates, by Charles LaDuca and Taylor Asen of Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP.
The Duracell Batteries False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Lauren Carlson, et al. v. The Gillette Company, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-14201, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
UPDATE: The Duracell battery class action lawsuit was dismissed on Oct. 21, 2015.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Subaru vehicle data collection class action lawsuit investigation
May 17, 2024 | Legal News
149 thoughts onDuracell Batteries Leak In Normal Use, Class Action Claims
My remote for my AC leaked last year so I purchased a new AC remote and installed Duracell batteries that leaked again.
The Duracell batteries for my AC remote leaked last year and it seemed destroyed so I purchased a replacement but fixed the older remote and installed Duracell batteries but again the batteries leaked. I won’t purchase Duracell again.
“Duracell – The (Rusty)Top Battery”
Re. “10 year guarantee” – Pffffft! Hmmm, coincidence that they’re the ONLY battery brand that “‘chose'” (ahem, felt the *need*) to offer that???
Re. only guaranteed while “in storage, not while being used”: Hmmm, coincidence that “in storage” (*OUTside* of a device) is when I’ve NEVER had ANY batteries leak, but rather “‘in storage'” *INside* of a device (as in a device that has not been used in awhile) and when they do, it’s only the Duracell ones???
In the past 2 decades+, I’ve used Duracell, Energizer, Rayovac, Tenergy (rechargeables only) and dozens of various generic / semi-generic (i.e. Panasonic) that came included with electronics and toys and Duracell batteries are the ONLY ones to leak on me!
The AA and AAA batteries have ruined a night vision monocular, an EOTech red dot sight and two or three (2-3) flashlights of mine in the last six (6) months. At one time they were all I would buy, never again, I have switched to the “Pink Bunny”. They have a guarantee posted on the front of the package. It is sad when a top line company starts relying on there past reputation and continues to produce a faulty product. So long Duracell.
I have had several Duracell batteries leak while still new and in the package. These batteries weren’t anywhere close to the expiration date. It seems to me that this problem is relatively new and getting worse. Time to try other brands.
And here I thought for the past year I was alone. I “used” to use only Duracell until a little less than a year ago. Then all of a sudden I started seeing more and more leaks until I lost a couple things –
That’s it !!! — NO MORE DURACELL for me…………
I have to confirm that they do leak. We have a lot of digital clocks in our church and Duracell was all we use to buy until I discovered that over half of our church clocks had batterry acid leaks stains and liquid from Duracell batteries. I switched over to the other leading brand “E”. Rayovacs leaks also but not as many. Our 2-way radios had really bad acid stains and damage from the leaks also. So far 4 clocks and 2 radios are completely ruined; the others, I was able to clean/scrape out the acid and they are working ok for now.
I again have some leaky Duracell batteries. Flashlight this time; clocks (indoors with an amazingly low current draw), toys (high current draw), and seemingly anything they are put into – all “cause” the Duracell’s to leak. A very high percentage of them leak. They are off my approved product list forever; send them all back to wherever false advertising and worthless guarantees are king.
worst batteries for leaking that I have used…they will claim that the batteries must have been in a hot environment while being used. Ruined my sons helicopter that he saved up for, and they were always inside…I saw a liquid coming from his controller, I opened it up and the batteries were all leaking only being in the controller for about 4 weeks. That was about the 4 “coincidence” with the duracells…never buying them again.
Steve
Richmond, VA
Yep! They certainly do leak.
I call them “Duraleak” and avoid them religiously.
Mike James
Round Rock Texas