Puracy Class Action Says Skin Care Items Falsely Advertised as ‘Natural’

Puracy LLC faces a class action lawsuit alleging that their skin care and cosmetic products are falsely advertised as natural.

Plaintiff Monica Martinez recently filed the Puracy class action lawsuit alleging that the brand’s skin care, cosmetics, and home cleaning products are wrongfully advertised as natural when they contain synthetic ingredients.

Puracy makes multiple product lines including skin care, cosmetics, personal care, and home cleaning items.

Martinez claims that the products contain synthetic or artificial ingredients such as ehtylhexylglycerin, caprylyl glycol, propanediol, benzisothiazolinone, cocamidopropyl hydroxysultaine, sodium lauroamphoacetate, sodium cocoyl isethionate, and sodium methyl cocoyl laurate. Despite containing these chemical ingredients, Puracy allegedly continues to market their products as “natural.”

According to the Puracy class action, Puracy prominently displays “natural” on the face of the products. The company allegedly further enhances their claim by displaying leaves on their packaging and by using statements like “naturally derived.”

Martinez claims that she and other consumers paid a premium price for a seemingly “natural” product and that reasonable consumers would be deceived by the packaging and advertising. Natural products are typically better for consumer health and Martinez feels she was manipulated into purchasing a product for false reasons.

The Puracy natural products class action lawsuit claims that these actions are in violation of California Business and Professions Code. This law states that it is “unlawful for any person to make or disseminate or cause to be made or disseminated before the public in this state, […] in any advertising device […] or in any other manner or means whatever, including over the Internet, any statement, concerning […] personal property or services, professional or otherwise, or performance or disposition thereof, which is untrue or misleading and which is known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading.”

Additionally, Martinez alleges that she cannot trust the packaging on the products due to the misleading claims. She also states that she doesn’t believe that the ingredient list is reliable either.

“The fact that Plaintiff now knows that ethylhexylglycerin and the other challenged ingredients are synthetic does not mean that she can simply look at Defendants’ labeling to determine whether its natural labeling is accurate,” the Puracy natural class action states. “Companies sometimes substitute one artificial ingredient for another, particularly when there is bad press about the ingredient.”

In April 2016, the Federal Trade Commission allegedly filed a complaint against multiple manufacturers for representing their products as “natural” when they contained synthetic ingredients. In response to the complaint, four companies agreed to cease marketing their products as “natural.”

Martinez seeks to represent a nationwide Class of people who purchased the Puracy products, as well as a California Class of the same individuals who are protected under additional state laws. The Puracy class action lawsuit seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages, restitution, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

The plaintiff is represented by Reuben D. Nathan of Nathan & Associates APC.

The Puracy Natural Products Class Action Lawsuit is Martinez v. Puracy LLC, Case No. 2:18-cv-03369, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.