Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.

Western Washingtonians Settle Exterior Sealant Action With Behr Process Corporation for $55 Million

Report Fraud
Case ID: 2548 | Consumer Products | 07/14/2003

The court has granted final approval to the parties' $55 million settlement in a class action against sealant manufacturer Behr Process Corporation on behalf of all residents of 19 western Washington state counties who purchased and applied any of four exterior wood sealants to their property there, at any time between May 28, 1992, and March 17, 2003, and who experienced mildew growth upon those surfaces after May 28, 1994. The action alleged that the products, which were advertised for use on exterior wood surfaces, caused extensive mildew damage to the surfaces on which they were applied, causing the company to be in violation of Washington Consumer Protection Act. Claims forms must be received by January 17, 2004, to be considered valid.

The settlement applies to all persons who purchased and applied any of the following Behr products in one of the counties listed below: Behr Super Liquid Raw-Hide No. 12, Behr Super Liquid Raw-Hide No. 13, Behr Natural Seal Plus No. 80 or Behr Natural Seal Plus No. 92. Persons covered by the settlement include those who signed a release with Behr after May 28, 1998, in exchange for a cash payment or replacement product, and wish to reopen their claims by filing a claim in this settlement. As to those persons, Behr is entitled to a setoff of any sums previously paid.

Only persons who applied the sealant to their property in Clallam, Clark, Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Jefferson, Island, King, Kitsap, Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Pierce, San Juan, Skagit, Skamania, Snohomish, Thurston, Wahkiakum, and Whatcom counties may take advantage of this settlement. If you live elsewhere, you may be eligible to take part in a class action settlement that covers the rest of the United States.

You can establish that you purchased and applied the specified Behr product by filing a verified proof of claim form. This form requires you to (1) provide sales receipts, invoices or bills for your purchase of one of the four Behr products, (2) to have partially used cans of the product, (3) to provide verified proof from yourself and a non-related witness that you purchased and applied the Behr product to your exterior wood surface, or (4) to provide a small sample of your wood surface, to which you believe the Behr Product is applied. This sample will then be tested to verify that the Behr Product was applied. You may be required to provide additional information, which will allow the claims administrator to evaluate your claim.

You can establish that your property was damaged by the Behr product by providing color photographs of the exterior wood surfaces to which the Behr product was applied, and which experienced mildew growth. If you have remediated the exterior wood surfaces affected by mildew, you can prove damage by providing a verified affidavit that your property to which the Behr product was applied suffered from mildew growth. Your verified affidavit must be accompanied by a third-party affidavit by an unrelated witness verifying that you remediated the wood surfaces to which the Behr product was applied.

The level of compensation that you will receive is determined by reference to a set of tables that allow calculation of the amount. These tables are attached to the notice that is available on the settlement website. The compensation formula is be based upon the product that was applied, the square footage of the wood surfaces, the kind of wood, whether the wood surface is on a first or second floor, and other factors that are contained in the damage matrices. The compensation formula includes $3,000 per claimant for landscaping, safety and environmental allowances, and interest at the rate of 1% per month from May 23, 2000. After the first 90 days of the claims period starting April 17, 2003, upon the recommendation by the claims administrator, the court may authorize a partial payment not to exceed 50% of each claim submitted and deemed eligible. If approved by the court, the payment will be made within 10 business days of the date of approval. All other payments of eligible claims will be made after January 17, 2004. If the processing and payment of eligible claims exceeds the settlement amount, then payments to eligible claimants will be reduced pro rata so that the settlement amount is not exceeded.

If you have experienced damage on more than one piece of property due to use of one of the sealants, you may make a claim for each property.


At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints.

Other Consumer Products Cases of Interest

A class action lawsuit has been filed in the Southern District Court of California against Union Oil Company of California (Unocal) for violations of patent law and the California Business and Professional Code. Class members seek compensatory and punitive damages, attorney's fees and costs of the litigation.
 
A Fort Smith attorney has filed a class-action lawsuit against Arkansas Oklahoma Gas Corporation, (AOG) claiming the company overcharged its customers. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of several named clients, as well as all customers of AOG.
 
The "See Clearly Method" kits claim to improve eyesight without surgery, yet they are the target of a consumer fraud lawsuit. A judge has issued a temporary injunction against the kit makers, Vision Improvement Technologies. The kits included manuals and tapes that show eye exercises and other techniques. According to the lawsuit, the company has shipped out as many as 5,000 to 10,000 kits a month at a cost of about $350 each. About half of the consumers who received the kit returned it within the 30 days and were not obligated to make the full payment, but many who did not return it within the 30 days still sought a refund for various reasons.
 
A class action lawsuit has been filed in the Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania against the 3M Company for violations of antitrust law regarding the sale of clear tape. Class members seek damages, injunctive relief, attorney's fees and costs.
 
Several class actions have been filed against food and beverage service company Lancer Corporation (NYSE:LAN) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 26, 2000, and February 4, 2004. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities.
 
A class action lawsuit seeking hundreds of millions of dollars from Microsoft is scheduled to go to trial in November 2006. The lawsuit recently made its way to the Iowa Supreme Court for the third time. If the trial is successful, thousands of Iowans who bought computers loaded with Microsoft programs since 1994 could get money back.
 
Become a LawCash Member - FREE!
'Find Money' E-Book
Weekly Email Alerts




privacy policy
YouNewz Beta
IT'S FREE

Report

Report Newz and easily upload your own newzworthy photos from your cell phone or computer to the web.

Share

Quickly share your photos with family, friends, co-workers, or the world with your own Newzpaper.

Read

Instantly find Newz and photos from other YouNewzers and read other YouNewzers Newzpapers.
 
Class Action Lawsuit Center || Product Recall Center || Consumer Complaint Center || About LawCash Link Exchange
Privacy Policy || Legal Policies || Terms & Conditions || Website Advertising Policy || Site Map || Top Lawsuits
LawCash® is a service of nola3, llc
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.

[ Home ]
LawCash
login
Justice is a click away.