SharkNinja class action alleges company shortchanges consumers on warranty

SharkNinja class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Plaintiff Kevin Ferrer filed a class action lawsuit against SharkNinja Operating LLC.
• Why: Ferrer claims SharkNinja shortchanges consumers on the length of the warranty for its products.
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

Global product design and technology company SharkNinja shortchanges consumers on the length of the warranty for its products by starting the warranty period on the date of purchase rather than the date of delivery, a new class action lawsuit alleges. 

Plaintiff Kevin Ferrer’s class action lawsuit claims SharkNinja’s alleged warranty practices saves the company time and money by not having to track delivery dates and discourages consumers from pursuing valid warranty claims.

“Defendant unfairly benefit by saving themselves the added time and expense that would be required to properly track and administer their warranties were they to commence on the date of delivery,” the SharkNinja class action says.

Ferrer wants to represent a California class of consumers who purchased a SharkNinja product after July 1, 2023, and received it after the purchase date, as well as a subclass of consumers who bought a SharkNinja product within the same time period that came with an express warranty that started on the purchase date instead of the delivery date.

SharkNinja required to commence express warranties on date of delivery, class action says

Ferrer argues SharkNinja is required by law to commence their express warranties on the date of delivery, rather than the date of purchase. 

“As a result of this unlawful and deceitful business practice, consumers who receive their goods after the date of purchase, such as online shoppers, do not receive the full benefit of their warranty,” the SharkNinja class action says. 

Ferrer claims SharkNinja is guilty of violating California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and Unfair Competition Law. 

The plaintiff demands a jury trial and requests declaratory and injunctive relief and an award of restitution, damages, civil penalties, punitive damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs for himself and all class members.

A separate complaint involving SharkNinja was removed to a Michigan federal court in early January. The consumer behind the lawsuit claims she was seriously injured while using an allegedly defective SharkNinja blender. 

Have you ever purchased a SharkNinja product? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Ryan L. McBride and Jonathan Gil of Kazerouni Law Group, APC, and Adib Assassi and Veronica Cruz of Assassi & Cruz Law Firm, PC.

The SharkNinja class action lawsuit is Ferrer, et al. v. SharkNinja Operating LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-00535-DMS-KSC, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Paul Mitchell class action alleges deceptive ‘Made in USA’ hair product claims
• Similac infant formula class action alleges products contain heavy metals
• Country Crock plant butter with ‘olive oil’ isn’t what it seems, class action says
• Judge certifies Bayer vitamin gummies class action