Investigation of Volkswagen, Porsche & Audi over use of soy-based wiring susceptible to destruction by vermin

Volkswagen, Porsche & Audi drivers have complained of numerous electrical issues and failures caused by a variety of vermin gnawing, chewing and ultimately eating through the electrical wires powering these cars.  Upon information and belief the manufacturers of these vehicles use soy based sheathing on the electrical wires that attracts a wide variety of vermin such as mice, rodents, rats, squirrels and even animals as large as possums. Depending on the wires that are damaged, this may lead to a variety of problems resulting in hundreds, if not thousands of dollars in repairs.  In addition to the effect on a variety of electrical systems, which itself poses a safety hazard to drivers and vehicle occupants, these animals may carry disease and therefore pose an additional health hazard by their presence in vehicles.

Volkswagen, Porsche & Audi manufacturers are manifestly aware that use of an organic based sheathing on wiring components has attracted a variety of vermin, and caused hundreds, if not thousands of dollars’ worth of damage to affected vehicles.  Despite this knowledge, manufacturers have refused to accept responsibility for the damage and routinely reject consumer claims both in and out of warranty, placing the onus of the entire bill on the car owners.

We believe this practice is unfair and potentially actionable. If your car has been affected by this issue and you wish to discuss your legal rights and potential remedies please use the contact attorney box below.  Also, if you wish to share your story publicly, we welcome your comments below.

 

Organic foods from China may not be so organic after all

For those of us dedicated to consumer protection, there is a really interesting article by the folks at Natural News about qualifying for organic certification, what it really means and does not mean.  The article starts with some amazing representations:  “You’re going to be shocked to learn that there is no limit to how much mercury, lead, cadmium, arsenic and aluminum is allowed in “organic” products. It’s a fact: USDA organic standards place NO LIMITS on levels of heavy metals contamination of certified organic foods. Even further, there is no limit on the contamination of PCBs, BPA and other synthetic chemicals that’s allowed in certified organic foods, superfoods and supplements.”  The remainder of the article is riveting and worth a read.  It can be found here: http://www.naturalnews.com/039195_organic_foods_China_pollution_nightmare.html

 

 

Vogue International Inc. sued for mislabeling Organix products

Defendant Vogue International Inc sells its Organix beauty pure and simple (hereafter “Organix”) line of products across the United States of America. Defendant manufactures, markets, and sells a wide variety of consumer products. Such products include moisturizers, creams, shampoo, conditioner, and oils. The entire line of products clearly says the word “Organix” on the front and states that product is free of sulfates and parabens.

As alleged, they are nothing of the sort. This false marketing – known as “greenwashing” – enables Defendant to unfairly capture sales that it would not make but for its deception, and also charges consumers a premium based upon the false perception that the products are organic.

To a reasonable and ordinary consumer, an “Organic” beauty product is one that is derived from fruits, vegetables and other crops that are grown, produced, handled, and processed according to strict guidelines. This includes, at a minimum, that: (1) the land used to produce organic source materials must be free of synthetic fertilizers and conventional pesticides; (2) the product must be derived from farming practices where the ingredients have not been genetically engineered or exposed to radiation; and most importantly, (3) the product must contain no synthetic ingredients.

The Organix Products do not qualify as “Organic” under any of the preceding criteria Defendant’s misrepresentations regarding the character and quality of its Products were designed to, and did, lead Plaintiff and others similarly situated to believe that the Products were organic. Plaintiff and members of the Class relied on Defendant’s misrepresentations and would not have paid as much, if at all, for the Products but for Defendant’s misrepresentations.

Accordingly, Plaintiff brings this lawsuit to enjoin the ongoing deception of thousands of California consumers by Defendant, and to recover the funds taken by this unlawful practice.