|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 4658 | Consumer Products | 02/15/2006
The maker of Thomas the Tank Engine, a popular childrens toy, was named in a class action law suit filed in Cook County Circuit Court in Illinois. The lawsuit claims the toymaker, RC2, is revoking a lifetime warranty.
Plaintiffs in the class action suit are parents Tanya Powers of Deerfield, IL and Lucy Brady of Clarendon Hills, IL. Both parents say they have spent a lot of money collecting the toys for their children. Brady says her 4-year-old son Christopher has 300 train cars and tracks. The children's mothers are upset because the makers of these toys are not honoring what the moms believe should be a lifetime warranty. The toys have been around since 1993, originally made by Learning Curve International. Yet in 2003, a company named RC2 brands acquired Learning Curve and that same year reduced the warranty to 90 days. "The problem is that they're applying that new 90-day warranty to the train products that were purchased before they changed the warranty," said an attorney representing the mothers. "Some of them can cost $30, just for trains. Some of the building and things are closer to $40 or $50. The reason you pay that much for a train is you think it's going to last a lifetime," said Brady. She estimates her family has spent $5,000 on the toys made popular by the TV show on PBS. The parents say a number of the toys have broken over the years. Attorneys state the case could involve tens of millions of dollars. 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 Lawyers plan to seek financial compensation for more than 14 million Americans who paid too much for heating and cooking fuel because British Petroleum (BP) oil compay allegedly manipulated the market for propane. A nationwide class action has been filed in Ohio against life insurance giant, Lincoln National Life Insurance Company. The action is brought on behalf of all U.S. residents who purchased life insurance policies from Lincoln and paid for such policies upon delivery, but who were actually charged a premium based on the earlier "policy date" when the policy was approved. The action is brought under state law for breach of contract and unjust enrichment and seeks compensatory damages, disgorgement of profits and injunctive and declaratory relief. Kahn Gauthier Swick is investigating possible legal actions on behalf of persons who contracted hepatitis A in outbreaks this fall in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee. The outbreak in Pennsylvania was the largest, with 615 cases as of November 25, including three deaths. Some 300 people were sickened in the other three states. A women’s health spa misleads customers into believing their membership contract cannot be canceled, claims a class action in St. Louis County Court. Plaintiffs claim USF Worldwide Holdings dba New Lady Fitness Healthspas use intentionally vague language to make customers believe they cannot cancel their memberships. Americans have come to place great faith in product labels. The parties have reached a tentative $3 million settlement in a nationwide class action filed against dietary supplement manufacturer The Chemins Company, Inc. and its owner, James R. Cameron, on behalf of all persons who purchased for their personal consumption powdered protein products manufactured by the company from January 1, 1993, to January 31, 2002. Claims must be postmarked on or before September 15, 2003, to be considered valid. The class has been certified in several consolidated class actions filed against energy utility AES Corporation (NYSE:AES) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock, including those who engaged in option transactions concerning AES securities, between July 27, 2000, and November 8, 2002. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations regarding the California energy market to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. |
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
