Purex Crystals Class Action Says Containers Deceive Consumers

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.

Purex Crystals are packaged to make purchasers think they’re getting more product than they actually are, according to a California plaintiff.

Plaintiff Anthony Buso is accusing defendant Henkel Corporation of underfilling containers of Purex Crystals.

Buso says the empty space inside the package, known as “slack-fill,” serves no legitimate function. He claims Henkel uses the slack-fill to mislead consumers in violation of California consumer protection laws.

Henkel Corp. markets Purex Crystals as an “in-wash fragrance booster,” used to apply a long-lasting perfume to clothes and linens.

According to this Purex Crystals class action lawsuit, packages of Purex Crystals are as much as 30 percent empty space. Buso says these packages are opaque, so would-be buyers cannot tell by looking that a significant portion of the package is empty.

This visual difference can be enough to deceive consumers into buying a product they would not have bought otherwise, Buso claims.

He quotes an article published in Consumer Reports in January 2010, in which Director Brian Wansink of the Cornell Food and Brand Lab said that “[m]ost 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,” Wansink said.

Buso says he bought a package of Purex Crystals in April 2017 from a Walmart in Poway, Calif. He says he was surprised to find when he opened the container that it was 30 percent empty. Buso says he would not have bought Purex Crystals had he known about the slack-fill inside the container.

His Purex Crystals class action lawsuit raises a claim under the California Fair Packaging and Labeling Act. Slack-fill can be permissible under that law, but only if it is used for a limited list of purposes, such as to protect the product or to provide a large-enough package to present required labeling information.

Slack-fill that does not serve any of these purposes is deemed “nonfunctional slack fill” and is considered misleading under the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act.

Buso argues that the slack-fill in Purex Crystals packages serves none of these purposes and is therefore impermissible nonfunctional slack-fill.

Buso wants to bring this Purex Crystals class action lawsuit on behalf of a plaintiff Class defined as all California residents who, within the applicable statutory limitations period, purchased Purex Crystals in allegedly misleading containers that create nonfunctional slack-fill.

He seeks a court order declaring that Henkel Corp. has violated California consumer protection laws. He also seeks injunctive relief and an award of damages, restitution, court costs and attorneys’ fees, all with pre- and post-judgment interest, plus any injunctive relief the court sees fit to grant.

Buso is represented by attorney Scott J. Ferrell of Pacific Trial Attorneys.

The Purex Crystals Underfilled Package Class Action Lawsuit is Anthony Buso v. Henkel Corp., Case No. 3:17-cv-01132, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.