fbpx

Sunday Riley Anti-Aging Class Action Lawsuit

This lawsuit claims that Sunday Riley marketed their “Bionic Anti-Aging Cream” as if it were an FDA approved drug that could change the physical structure and function of the skin, when in fact nothing in the product is effective in causing physiological changes to the structure and function of the skin in a way that prevents the signs of aging.

            One plaintiff in this cause, Helena Armstrong, is a resident of New York State.  In 2016, she saw Sunday Riley’s anti-aging claims on their product page on www.beauty.com.  These claims included that the product “[I]s the ‘multi-vitamin’ of anti-aging creams, combating every anti-aging concern and the cause of aging,” and “[I]s loaded with Resveratrol and EGCG, ingredients that activate your body’s ability to extend the lifespan of our cells (true anti-aging!) and repair and restore collage, the ‘building block’ of the skin.” There were many other similar claims as well.  In reliance on such claims, Armstrong purchased the product for personal consumption from www.beauty.com, which was mailed to her residence.  The retail purchase price was approximately $125.00 for one 1.70-ounce bottle of the product.  She purchased the product reasonably believing it would provide the advertised anti-aging benefits, although the product did not work because it is not a drug capable of changing the structure and function of the skin. 

            The Bionic Anti-Aging Cream was not approved by the FDA to be marketed as a drug, because it is not a functioning drug.  The FDA defines cosmetics that affect the structure of the skin as drugs.  They state that, “A product intended to be applied to the human body for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance is a cosmetic.  If this product claims to accomplish these deeds through physiological activity or by changing the structure of the skin, it is also a drug.”  The FDCA defines substances as “drugs” if they are “articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man.” Sunday Riley profits handsomely by making false, deceptive, and misleading claims about the product’s physiological effects in packaging, online descriptions, and other promotional material.  They know that their product does not live up to its promises, yet designs it marketing and advertising campaign to include indicia of scientific research and promises of specific results for the sole purpose of misleading and deceiving consumers. 

            Based on the facts of the case, the plaintiffs in this lawsuit allege that Sunday Riley violated the Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, the Unlawful False Advertising Act, California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California’s Unfair Competition Law, and California’s False Advertising Law.  Plaintiffs further allege that they committed negligent misrepresentation and breached express warranties.

 

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer

Most Recent Case Event

Sunday Riley Anti-Aging Complaint

December 2, 2016

This complaint claims that Sunday Riley's Bionic Anti-Aging Cream does not prevent the effects of aging, despite the advertising that claims otherwise.

sunday_riley_anti-aging_complaint.pdf

Case Event History

Sunday Riley Anti-Aging Complaint

December 2, 2016

This complaint claims that Sunday Riley's Bionic Anti-Aging Cream does not prevent the effects of aging, despite the advertising that claims otherwise.

sunday_riley_anti-aging_complaint.pdf
Tags: Anti-Aging Claims, Deceptive Advertising, Deceptive Labels