False Advertising

Dyson Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Alleged Warranty Violations

Updated on
Published on
Dyson Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Alleged Warranty Violations

In a recent class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Courts in the Illinois Northern District, Elise Castiel, the plaintiff, alleges that Dyson, Inc., the defendant, violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, and New York General Business Law § 349 and § 350. The plaintiff claims that the defendant misrepresented and/or failed to disclose material facts concerning their products, and that the defendant"s conduct was unfair and/or deceptive.

What Laws Did Dyson Allegedly Violate?

The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which the plaintiff alleges Dyson violated, prohibits warrantors from conditioning the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance. The Federal Trade Commission Act, another law the plaintiff claims Dyson breached, prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices. Lastly, New York General Business Law § 349 and § 350, which the plaintiff alleges Dyson violated, prohibit deceptive acts and practices concerning the unlawfulness of repair restrictions that are included in warranties and false advertising in the conduct of any business, trade, or commerce, respectively.

According to the plaintiff, Dyson violated these laws by misrepresenting and/or failing to disclose material facts concerning the products, engaging in unfair and/or deceptive conduct, conditioning a warranty on the consumer’s using only an authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts, and making false, misleading, and deceptive statements and representations of fact that were likely to mislead a reasonable consumer acting reasonably under the circumstances.

What Led to the Filing of the Lawsuit?

The plaintiff alleges that Dyson, Inc. misrepresented and/or failed to disclose material facts concerning their products. This alleged misrepresentation and failure to disclose, according to the plaintiff, led to consumers purchasing products under false pretenses. The plaintiff further alleges that Dyson"s conduct was unfair and/or deceptive, leading to the filing of the lawsuit.

Furthermore, the plaintiff alleges that Dyson conditioned a warranty on the consumer’s using only an authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts. This alleged condition, according to the plaintiff, is a violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, leading to the inclusion of this claim in the lawsuit.

Who Are the Class Members?

The class members in this case are consumers who purchased Dyson's product in the United States. To be a part of the class, the consumer must have purchased Dyson's product in the United States. The class is divided into two subclasses: a nationwide class and a New York subclass. The nationwide class includes consumers from all states in the United States, while the New York subclass includes consumers from the state of New York.

The plaintiff, on behalf of herself and the proposed Classes and New York Subclass, brings this claim against Dyson for violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301, et seq., New York General Business Law § 350, and the Federal Trade Commission Act.

What Damages Is the Plaintiff Seeking?

The plaintiff is seeking damages for the alleged violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, and New York General Business Law § 349 and § 350. The plaintiff believes that there are hundreds of thousands of Class and Subclass Members who have been affected by Dyson"s alleged conduct, and that a class action is the best way to resolve the dispute.

While the exact dollar amount is not stated in the complaint, it is understood that the plaintiff is seeking at least five million dollars in damages. The lawsuit seeks to establish whether Dyson"s conduct was unlawful and, if so, to provide damages to the Classes.

What Could Be the Next Steps in the Case?

The next steps in the case will likely involve Dyson responding to the allegations. The court will then decide whether to certify the class. If the class is certified, the case will proceed to discovery, where both sides will gather evidence to support their claims.

Depending on the outcome of discovery, the case may go to trial or be settled out of court. If the case goes to trial and the court finds in favor of the plaintiff, Dyson could be ordered to pay damages to the class members. If the case is settled, the terms of the settlement will determine the compensation for the class members.

Case Facts

  • Status:
    Lawsuit Filed
  • Case Number:
    1:23-cv-03477
  • Filing Date:
    June 1, 2023
  • Jurisdiction:
    U.S. District Courts
  • State:
    Illinois
  • Court:
    Illinois Northern District
  • Plaintiff:
    Elise Castiel
  • Defendant:
    Dyson, Inc.
  • Plaintiff Firm:
    Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman
  • Defendant Firm:
  • Claims Administrator:
Contributors
Will Gendron
Will Gendron
Editor in Chief
Weekly newsletter

Stay up to date with new class action settlements you may join.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Complaint

This browser does not support inline PDFs. Please download the PDF to view it: Download PDF

Related class action lawsuits

Read more to get notified about updates to each case.

Beliv LLC Faces Class Action Over Misleading Fruit Nectar Labels
False Advertising

Beliv LLC Faces Class Action Over Misleading Fruit Nectar Labels

Lawsuit alleges Beliv LLC's Petit Nectar 'strawberry banana' product misleadingly labeled, violating Florida's consumer protection laws.
Caesars Sportsbook Faces Class Action over 'Risk-Free' Bets
False Advertising

Caesars Sportsbook Faces Class Action over 'Risk-Free' Bets

Lawsuit alleges Caesars Sportsbook misled customers with 'free bet' and 'risk-free' bet offers, violating consumer protection laws.
I-Health Faces Lawsuit Over Alleged False Claims, Plaintiffs Seek Damages
False Advertising

I-Health Faces Lawsuit Over Alleged False Claims, Plaintiffs Seek Damages

Lawsuit alleges I-Health falsely labeled its Culturelle Ultimate Balance for Antibiotics products, violating FDA and California consumer protection laws.
Reynolds Wrap Faces Lawsuit Over 'Made in U.S.A.' Claims
False Advertising

Reynolds Wrap Faces Lawsuit Over 'Made in U.S.A.' Claims

Lawsuit alleges Reynolds Wrap's 'Made in U.S.A.' claim is deceptive, violating California's consumer protection laws and misleading consumers.
Sephora Faces Class Action over Nutrafol: Damages Sought
False Advertising

Sephora Faces Class Action over Nutrafol: Damages Sought

Sephora is facing a class action lawsuit over its Nutrafol product. The lawsuit alleges false advertising, violation of consumer laws, and seeks damages.
Apple iCloud Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Alleged Storage Misrepresentation
False Advertising

Apple iCloud Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Alleged Storage Misrepresentation

Apple Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit alleging that it misrepresented the storage capacity of its iCloud service, violating California's consumer protection laws.
UFC Faces Class Action over Fight Pass Subscriptions
False Advertising

UFC Faces Class Action over Fight Pass Subscriptions

UFC is facing a class action lawsuit over allegations of violating California's Automatic Renewal Law with its Fight Pass subscriptions.
Dyson Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Alleged Warranty Violations
False Advertising

Dyson Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Alleged Warranty Violations

Dyson, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit alleging violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and deceptive practices.
Lyft & Grubhub Face $5 Million Lawsuit Over Deceptive Practices
False Advertising

Lyft & Grubhub Face $5 Million Lawsuit Over Deceptive Practices

Lawsuit alleges Lyft and Grubhub engaged in deceptive practices, misrepresenting fees, prices, and services, violating New York laws, and seeking at least $5 million in damages.
1-800-Flowers Faces Class Action for Auto-Renewal Violations
False Advertising

1-800-Flowers Faces Class Action for Auto-Renewal Violations

Lawsuit alleges 800-Flowers, Inc. violated California's UCL and FAL by failing to obtain consent for automatic renewal terms, causing damages.
Chobani Zero Sugar Lawsuit: Seeking Damages for Deceptive Claims
False Advertising

Chobani Zero Sugar Lawsuit: Seeking Damages for Deceptive Claims

Lawsuit alleges Chobani falsely advertised "zero sugar" products, violating Illinois Consumer Fraud Act and California's UCL & FAL; seeks restitution.