P&G Faces Class Action Over Empty Space in Tide Packaging

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.

Tide Detergent is the latest target in a series of recent “slack fill” class action lawsuits that allege that manufacturers like Procter & Gamble are misleading consumers by using deceptively oversized product packaging.

Three plaintiffs filed the class action lawsuit against P&G alleging that the company has “routinely employed deceptive packaging containing excessive empty space to mislead customers into believing that they were receiving more laundry detergent than they actually were.”

Additionally, the Tide class action lawsuit alleges that the larger packaging used in Tide products gives P&G more shelf space for their products, giving their product an advantage in grocery stores.

The Tide class action lawsuit claims that P&G has made millions of dollars through their employment of allegedly deceptive business practices with their product packaging “in misleading containers with at least 11% non-functional empty space” and up to 21% empty space, in alleged violation of state laws prohibiting deceptive acts and practices.

Procter & Gamble has faced other slack fill lawsuits and other companies including The Clorox Co., Unilever and McCormick & Co. Inc. have also been faced with similar allegations.

In July, P & G said the company would change its packaging on Olay skin care products to resolve allegations in a California consumer lawsuit that accused the company of using deceptively oversized product packaging. P&G also paid $850,000 to settle the Olay slack fill lawsuit.

The potential Class Members in the Tide Detergent lawsuit include consumers who purchased Tide Original, Tide Clean Breeze, Tide Plus a Touch of Downy, Tide Plus Bleach Alternative, Tide Simply Clean and Fresh, Tide Free and Gentle and “any other Tide products filled as to be misleading.”

The lead plaintiffs from California, Florida and New York claim they would not have purchased the Tide Detergent products or they would have paid less for them if the products were not packaged in the allegedly deceptive product packaging. They also claim that they would still be willing to purchase the detergent if the product packaging was changed to more accurately reflect the contents, omitting the empty space or if there was a disclaimer on the product fill.

In addition to the allegations of oversized packaging, the plaintiffs also took issue with other aspects of the products packaging design. The plaintiffs allege the integrated pour spout on the products and “the bottom of the integrated pour spout ends well below the rim required for the screw in cap.” They illustrated their point with photographs, noting, “There is simply no reason, even with the spigot apparatus, why the liquid detergent could not be filled to the top of the bottle.”

The plaintiffs also brought up the transparent strip on the side of the handle that allows for visibility of the product when it is half full or less, saying that any product is not visible above the strip. The plaintiffs claim, “This is a conscious effort intended to mislead the consumer, as the Defendants knowingly and deliberately chose to add a transparent strip that would not allow consumers to see the significant amount of empty space toward the top of the container.”

The plaintiffs bring forth counts on behalf of themselves and the proposed nationwide Class including negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and violations of state consumer protection laws in New York, California and Florida. They are seeking compensatory and punitive damages, restitution, and injunctive relief to repackage products.

“Defendants’ misrepresentations are part of their systematic product packaging practices. There is no practical reason to package the products in oversize containers other than to mislead consumers as to the actual volume of the products being purchased,” the Tide class action lawsuit alleges.

The plaintiffs are represented by C.K. Lee, Anne Seelig and Shan Shan Zheng of Lee Litigation Group PLLC.

The Tide Detergent Class Action Lawsuit is Johana Garcia, et al. v. The Procter & Gamble Co., et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-09174, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.