Brita water filter firm accused of false promoting

LOS ANGELES — A lawsuit filed in opposition to the maker of some of the nation’s hottest water filtration strategies has accused the Brita agency of falsely selling that its merchandise take away or reduce hazardous contaminants from faucet water.

The proposed class-action lawsuit, which was filed ultimate Wednesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court docket, claims that deceptive selling has led shoppers to falsely think about that Brita merchandise filter such contaminants as arsenic, nitrate, hexavalent chromium and certain PFAS, or “perpetually chemical substances,” from faucet water.

Brita is owned by Clorox Co., which is headquartered in Oakland. Clorox launched an announcement Wednesday saying it was nonetheless reviewing the criticism, nevertheless appeared forward to “defending ourselves vigorously.”

“Brita takes the transparency of the number of water filtration choices we provide critically,” the assertion acknowledged. “Our merchandise embody a normal filtration possibility that improves style and odor of faucet water and is licensed to scale back recognized contaminants as communicated. For these shoppers in search of water filters licensed to scale back PFOS or PFOA, the Brita Elite pour-through and Brita Hub are each licensed to scale back PFOS/PFOA, in addition to lead and different recognized contaminants.”

The lawsuit was filed by Los Angeles County resident Nicholas Brown, who’s at current the one plaintiff. Brown purchased a Brita water pitcher and regular filter for about $15 in 2022 after learning the product label and believing the machine would filter contaminants to underneath lab detectable limits, the lawsuit acknowledged.

“Sadly, the Merchandise should not almost as efficient as defendant intentionally leads individuals to imagine, inflicting shoppers to overpay thousands and thousands and forego more practical options,” the lawsuit acknowledged. “On this manner, defendant has not solely bilked thousands and thousands of {dollars} from shoppers in ill-gotten positive factors, however Defendant has put the well being and welfare of thousands and thousands of shoppers and their households in danger.”

The agency’s promoting “creates the phantasm of security and safety for individuals and their households,” acknowledged Ryan Clarkson, managing companion of the Clarkson Legislation Agency in Malibu. “And that’s actually the large drawback that we have to clear up right here. When persons are operating their faucet water with PFAS by means of these Brita water filters, it’s only a superfluous act. It does nothing in any respect because it pertains to chemical substances like PFAS.”

The lawsuit argues that claims on the labels and packages of certain Brita water filters, pitchers and dispensers — resembling “Cleaner, Nice-Tasting Water for Over [20, 25, or 30] Years,” “The #1 FILTER” and “Reduces 3X Contaminants” — are false and misleading. Different claims like “Higher water for you. Higher water for the planet” and “Recent filter = Recent water” reinforce shopper beliefs that the merchandise take away or reduce to underneath lab detection limits frequent hazardous contaminants, the lawsuit says.

— Dorany Pineda / Los Angeles Instances