Claims that Chase bank persuaded people to join and enroll in certain debt management plans is what the Abat et al. v. Chase Bank Class Action Lawsuit revolves around.  If you paid a fee to one of the following credit agencies based upon a referal from Chase your rights might be effected by this class action lawsuit.  The credit agencies involved in this lawsuit are as follows alphabetically:

A Better Way Credit Counseling
AmeriDebt
CrediCure
Debticated Consumer Counseling
Debtscape
Mason Credit Counseling
Nexum Credit Counseling
PreActiv
The Credit Network
Visual Credit Counseling

The case is entitled  Abat, et al. v. Chase Bank USA, N.A., et al and is in the jurisdciton of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Southern Division.  In order to reap settlement benefits you MUST file a claim form.  All claim forms, objections and exclusions are due by 10/10/11.  The settlement fairness hearing will be held on 11/07/11  at 1:30 p.m.  The fairness hearing will be held at 411 West Fourth Street, Courtroom 9B, Santa Ana, CA 92701 if you wish to attend.  Chase has denied any wrong doing in the case but has agreed to settlement terms in order to prevent any further litigation.  If the total number of  claims submitted is less than 3,000 then each Class Member who submits a valid and timely claim will receive $750 according to the settlement terms.

More information to include instructions on how to file a claim can be found at www.AbatSettlementClass.com

Dream Water and Sarpes Beverages are in some deep water over claims that that their product does not live up to its advertisement.  Dream Water is advertised as a sleep aid that will help the customer become relax, fall asleep and or stay asleep.  Dream Water cost $20.00 for a six pack!  That is $3.33 per bottle.  This stuff better work for that price… but the Dream Water Scam Class Action Lawsuit contends it is misleading and there is no research to support these claims.  Dream Water claims that their product works better than many popular sleep aids and is a “safe and effective cure for sleep disorders.”

The lawsuit class disagrees:

“Dream Water, according to Defendant, has no side effects and provides its amazing sleep benefits without making users feel groggy or drowsy the next day like other over-the-counter and prescription sleep aids. Although Defendant uses images and language to represent that these claims about its products have been clinically proven and endorsed by medical organizations and professionals, the reality is that Defendant has no such support for its baseless representations. Defendant simply is and has been misrepresenting the effectiveness of its products to the general public, in order to reap windfall profits,”

One of the main ingredients in Dream Water is melatonin.  Dream Water contends that this added ingredient assist people in feeling more relax and ables them to fall asleep and stay asleep.

The class action suit claims that  melatonin is not safe:

“”In reality, Defendant has no support whatsoever for these claims,” the class action lawsuit says. “It has conducted no studies examining the safety or effectiveness of its ‘proprietary’ combination of the effective ingredients in the Dream Water products let alone the products themselves. Defendant is simply selling snake-oil as a purported cure for one of the most important health problems faced by millions of Americans.”

The Dream Water lawsuit is entitled Joe Ferris v. Dream Products, LLC and Sarpes Beverages, LLC and includes anyone who has ever purchased Dream Water.  The case will be heard in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of San Diego.  A copy of the Dream Water Scam Lawsuit  can be read HERE.

A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nestle Water claiming breach of contract and violations of the Consumer Fraud Act.  Nestle delivers bottled water to many customers everyday.  This particular lawsuit claims that Nestle defrauded some of their customers by charging them excessive late fees and that these fees should of never been filed in the first place.  The plaintiffs are reportedly seeking $50,000,000 million in damages.  The Nestle water brands involved in this class action lawsuit are as follows:  Poland Spring Brand 100% Natural Spring Water, Arrowhead Brand 100% Mountain Spring Water, Deer Park Brand 100% Natural Spring Water, and Perrier. 

The excessive late fees are defined to be  75% or more of the customers monthly bill. The attorney remarked the following about the excessive late fee:  “Under the law, a late fee must be reasonable,” said another attorney representing the Plaintiffs. “Nestle Waters’ flat $15-$20 late fee fails that test because the company charges the same amount no matter how large the fee is in relation to the amount overdue, or how many days the payment is late.”

Nestle Waters North America is the largest bottled water company in the US accounting for 41% of the market.  Whether Nestle unlawfully breached their contract and violated the Consumer Fraud Act in New Jersey and all other states will be a key topic in the Nestle Waters Late Fee Lawsuit.

A $627,000,000 settlement is being reported in the Wachovia Preferred class action lawsuit.  The lawsuit is entitled Wachovia Preferred Securities and Bond/Notes Litigation and claims Wachovia violated the Securities Act of 1933.  Class members are defined as anyone whom purchased Bond Class Securities from the first date that the bonds were offered through February 27, 2009. 

Important dates in the Wachovia Preferred Class Action Settlement are as follows:

October 25, 2011: the date all exclusions and objections are due.
December 28, 2011: the date all claims forms are due.
November 14, 2011: the date of the settlement fairness hearing.

More information to include claim filing instructions can be found at www.WachoviaBondLitigation.com

A settlement amount of $18,000,000 has been proposed in the Visa Prepaid Debit Card Customer Service class action lawsuit.  The lawsuit claims that Visa called certain customers in the state of California, Florida, Maryland, New Hampshire, Nevada, or Washington and recorded the call without the customers knowledge or consent.  The case is entitled Francisco Marenco vs. Visa Inc. and is in the jurisdiction of the United States District Court, Central District of California. 

Eligible class members in the state of California can receive a maximum payout of $5000 while other class members in the remaining states maximum payout is $1000.  The Affected Phone Line call must of been made prior to October 1, 2010 and the list of phone lines can be found here.  A class member can either 1. file a claim for your share of money 2. object; 3. do nothing; or 4. exclude yourself from the Settlement.  All claim forms must be filed no later than October 19, 2011. 

The fairness hearing will be held on November 28, 2011 at 9:30 a.m to determine if the settlement terms are fair and reasonable.  A copy of court documents related to the Visa Prepaid Debit Card Customer Service Class Action Settlement  can be found here.

A lawsuit has been filed against the popular work out company 24 Hour Fitness.  The lawsuit states the 24 Hour Fitness charged customers an extra month of due after they cancelled their membership.  This is for customers who signed up for the “Unlimited Guest Services” membership.  The lawsuit states:

“that when members cancel their membership, 24 Hour Fitness makes “one additional EFT ‘tap’ to the bank or credit card accounts” of the member, and then applies the last-month dues it already has collected to the month after that. By doing so, the class action lawsuit says, 24 Hour Fitness forced Class Members to pay membership dues for a period of 60-90 days after they cancel their membership.”

The case is entitled Albert Alatorre v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc., and is in the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.  Class members include people in the US who signed a 24 Hour Fitness Unlimited Guest Services SPA contract since the four years prior to the filing of the lawsuit.  A copy of the complaint can be found here.

A class action settlement has been reached out of the United States District Court; Northern District of California, Oakland Division in the B2Mobile and LeadClick Media class action lawsuit.  The lawsuit revolves around claims that B2Mobile and LeadClick Media sent unsolicited text ads to consumers without customer authorization.  Class members include anyone who received an unsolicited text from the companies between the dates of January 1, 2008 through July 29, 2011.  A settlement amount of up to $100 could be paid to each eligible class member. 

The lawesuit is entitled Kramer v. B2Mobile, LLC and a settlement fund of $12,200,000 has been developed.  A claim form can be submitted by mail or online HERE.  Claim forms must be postmarked on or before March 12, 2012 or 45 days after the Court issues an order order granting final approval whichever is later will not be honored according to the lawsuit terms.  www.textadclass.com also provides other court related documents along with a help FAQ about the B2Mobile & LeadClick Text Ad Class Action Lawsuit Settlement. 

The final amount class members will receive depends on how many claims are filed.  If the settlement amount is less that $5 per class member it wil be donated to charity.  The Fairness Hearing is scheduled for January 26, 2012 but is subject to change. 

Overtime, meal breaks, and rest breaks are the topics of controversy in the California Institute of Technology Class Action Lawsuit.  The lawsuit states that workers at Caltech’s locations in California were denied meal breaks, rest breaks, and overtime in violation of California law.  If you worked at Caltech between July 13, 2006 through April 14, 2011 you might be a class member of this lawsuit. 

Caltech denies all claims of wrongdoing in the lawsuit.  A $1.7 million settlement fund is being reported for those who filed eligible claim forms before August 26, 2011.  Any individual settlement payment depends on the amount of valid claim forms submitted and approved by the courts. 

 The final approval hearing is set for October 3, 2011 where the court will decide if the settlement is fair among other things.  The fairness hearing will be held at the Los Angeles County Superior Court, located at 111 N. Hill St., Los Angeles, CA 90012.  Please notify the courts if you wish to speak at the hearing.  If you filed a claim and would like to track the status of the form please go HERE.  Your claim form should be available within 24 hours if you filed online or 1 to 2 weeks if you filed by mail. 

The California Institute of Technology Class Action Lawsuit website can be found at:  www.CitSettlement.com

Lawsuit entitled: Sandra L. Palmer v. Sprint Solutions, Inc., Case Number. 09-cv-01211-JLR

What is this lawsuit about?:  The Sprint Solutions class action lawsuit claims that the following laws were violated: Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227, (“TCPA”), Washington’s Automatic Dialing and Announcing Device statute, Wash. Rev. Code § 80.36.400, and Washington’s Consumer Protection Act, Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86, et seq.  The laws were violated according to the lawsuit when telephone solicitation calls were made to the Class Representative and Members when they specifically requested not to have these types of calls made.  The automatic dialing and announcing device calls a person house and automatically starts playing a prerecorded message once the call is answered. 

Who is a class member?:  Class members are defined as any Sprint customer who between July 23, 2005 through June 13, 2011:

1. Lived in Washington State and received from Sprint directly or from its agents one or more commercial telephone solicitations that used an automatic dialing and announcing device; and/or
2. Lived in Washington State and received from Sprint directly or from its agents one or more commercial telephone solicitations less than one year after advising Sprint or its agents that he or she did not wish to be called again by Sprint; and/or
3. Lived in the United States and received from Sprint directly or from its agents one or more commercial telephone solicitations more than 30 days after advising Sprint or its agents that he or she did not wish to be called again by Sprint.

according to the  www.palmersolicitationcallsettlement.com FAQ.

Important Dates include:  All claim forms MUST be in no later than November 21, 2011 .  All objections and exclusion request must be in by September 21, 2011.  The fairness hearing will be held on October 21, 2011 at 10:00 a.m.

Claim Form?  A claim can be filed online or by mail.  To file a claim online please go to: www.palmersolicitationcallsettlement.com/claim

Settlement Fund Amount?  A $5,000,000 settlement fund has been reported in the Sprint Solutions Class Action Lawsuit.  under the settlement terms each eligible class member will receive a minimum of $100 cash and maybe more.

The official class admin website can be found at: www.PalmerSolicitationCallSettlement.com