Home > Industrial News
Newsletter
for wholesale
about the latest offers and deals Subscribe today!

P&G may have to compensate consumers for false toothpaste claims

Procter & Gamble advertised that its toothpaste provided relief from tooth sensitivity within minutes. (Photo: Michael Nivelet/Shutterstock)

2013-3-1 | News Americas


P&G may have to compensate consumers for false toothpaste claims
by Dental Tribune International

CINCINNATI, Ohio, USA: As reported by Top Class Actions, an online platform for lawyers to inform clients about new lawsuits and investigations, a federal judge has preliminarily approved a class action lawsuit settlement that will order Procter & Gamble to compensate consumers for false claims made about its Crest Sensitivity toothpaste.

According to Top Class Actions, the proposed settlement will provide consumers with a $4 refund for each tube of Crest Sensitivity Treatment and Protection toothpaste purchased in the U.S. Plaintiff Edward Rossi and several other consumers had filed the suit against P&G in December 2011, claiming that the toothpaste does not provide rapid relief from tooth sensitivity despite this being advertised.

In addition, Rossi claimed that the company "tricks purchasers into paying a 75 percent price premium over comparable products that do not claim to provide rapid relief but require weeks of use to reduce tooth sensitivity."

According to the lawsuit document, he said further that Crest Sensitivity is actually identical to P&G's Crest Pro-Health toothpaste, except for the packaging, which includes claims of rapid relief, a slightly different color and price, which is $3 higher.

Top Class Actions reported that P&G denied the allegations but has agreed to a settlement to resolve the litigation. It also stated that the settlement provides adequate relief to the plaintiffs and resolves the claim that P&G had violated state consumer fraud laws.

In September 2011, the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau reported that there is no scientific evidence to support P&G's claims. The NDA thus recommended that P&G discontinue the claims.