The Vector Marketing Training Time class action lawsuit settlement has finally been agreed upon.  The amount of the settlement is $13 million according to the settlement agreement.  The lawsuit revolved around Vector not paying minimum wages to its sales representatives… ouch!  The lawsuit is entitled Harris v. Vector Marketing Corporation and includes anyone who signed a Sales Representative Agreement in California with Vector Marketing between the time frame of October 15, 2004 and April 6, 2011.  Each class member will receive a settlement of $57 to $75 under the settlement terms.

There are two (2) settlement subclasses: (1) the Training Time Subclass and (2) the Sample Kit Subclass.  

Important dates are as follows:  In order to collect a settlement in the Vector Marketing Sales Representative Wage lawsuit a claim form must be filed by July 8, 2011.  The form must be signed.  All objections are due by June 23, 2011.  The settlement fairness hearing is set for August 10, 2011. 

The settlement notice can be found here: http://www.marlinandsaltzman.com/notice-training-time-only.pdf

If you bought Kinoki Foot Pads and they did not live up to the “absorb toxins from your body” promise you may be a class member of the Kinoki Foot Pads Class Action Lawsuit Settlement.  Many customers purchased these pads based on the promise that wearing these pads would help reduce and absorb toxins from their bodies.  The plantiffs states if they knew that the pads did not follow through on this product they would of never purchased the Kinoki Foot Pads. 

A full refund or up to $30 cash is available under the settlement terms.  If you have a receipt your eligible for the full refund.  If you do not have the receipt your eligible for the $30 cash refund.  This lawsuit is entitled Priscilla Hojiwala, et al. vs. Idea Village Products Corp and all claim forms must be filed or postamrked by July 1, 2011.  The settlement fairness hearing is set for July 22, 2011.  If you wish to speak at the hearing please notify the court by July 1, 2011 by sending a letter saying that it is your “Notice of Intent to Appear”.

It should be noted that Kinoki denies all allegations of wrongdoing and of liability, however, both sides agreed to the Settlement to avoid the cost and risk of further litigation.  A potential class member can access the following documents at www.footpadsettlement.com. 

•Preliminary Approval Order
•Settlement Agreement
•Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement
•Claim Form
•Opt Out Form

 The online claim form can be found here in the Kinoki Foot Pads Class Action Settlement.

The NIVEA Good-bye Cellulite is under heavy fire claiming that the product was in violation of the  unfair and deceptive trade practices acts of Florida and California.  The complete line of NIVEA products in this lawsuit are as follows: NIVEA Good-bye Cellulite Gel Cream, NIVEA Good-bye Cellulite Gel Patches, NIVEA Goodbye, Cellulite 30-Day Body Beauty Program, and NIVEA Good-bye Cellulite Fast Acting Serum.

Good-bye Cellulite Products claim a decreased  appearance of cellulite and alleged various theories of recovery.  These statements are thought and claimed to be misleading under the NIVEA Good-bye Cellulite Class Action Lawsuit Settlement.

If you or someone you know purchased a NIVEA Good-bye Cellulite Product listed above between the dates of January 1, 2007 and February 15, 2011 you could be a class member of this lawsuit.  Please note that ALL claims forms must be filed or postmarked by July 19, 2011.  No exceptions.  You must file a claim to collect any kind of settlement.  A $3.175 million settlement fund has been developed. 

The following documents can be viewed and downloaded at www.gbcsettlement.com:

Full Notice
Claim Forms
Settlement Agreement and General Release
Preliminary Approval Order
Summary Notice

Mailing address to submit a claim form:
GBC Settlement Administrator
c/o Strategic Claims Services
600 N Jackson Street, Suite 3
Media, PA 19063

The Bank Of America Mortgage Modification Class Action Lawsuit revolves around claims that BOA, according to the lawsuit,  “agreed to take part in the U.S. Treasury Department’s $75 billion Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) since it accepted bailout funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), but allegedly had an incentive not to modify loans because doing so might cause it to repurchase more loans, collect lower servicing fees, or assess lower default charges because fewer payments would be deemed late.”

The case was filed on the behalf of homeowners who claim that Bank Of America screwed them over on the modify troubled mortgages agreement.  The case is in the jurisdiction of the U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington.

Mack Trucks has agreed to a $525 million settlement to end the Mack Trucks & Volvo Retiree Health Benefit Class Action Lawsuit entitled Rachilla et al v. Mack Trucks Inc et al.  This case was in the jurisdiction of U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and case number 07-03737.  The lawsuit revolved around claims that that Mack Trucks illegally reduced lifetime health benefits.

A settlement hearing has been scheduled for September 7th in Philadelphia.  The settlement reduces medical coverage to over 9,000 retirees, but it funds a new health-care plan for them.  The Mack Trucks Health Benefit Class Action Lawsuit was originally filed on November12, 2008.  Please check back for more details after the settlement fariness hearing.

Another class action lawsuit has been filed for electronically printed receipts which displayed more than the last five digits of the customer’s credit or debit card account number.  In other words the receipts showed to much information on the customers credit card. This is in violation of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (a.k.a FACTA) and is not the first of its kind.  The lawsuit is entitled Yaakoby v. EagleRider and is in the jurisdiction of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.  If you or someone you know rented a motorcycle from EagleRider or any of its affiliates between the years 2006 and 2009 you could be a class member of the EagleRider FACTA Class Action Lawsuit. 

Settlement benefits include three options according to the lawsuit:

Benefit Option A.  If a EagleRider FACTA class member selects Benefit Option A, they will be entitled to receive a single, one-time motorcycle rental discount, to be reflected in a secure coupon issued for a single use at EagleRider locations. 

Benefit Option B. If a EagleRider FACTA class member selects Benefit Option B, they will be entitled to receive a single, one-time motorcycle purchase discount, to be reflected in a secure coupon issued for a single use.  The coupon is for $100 off the purchase price of a used motorcycle!

Benefit Option C.  If a EagleRider FACTA class member selects Benefit Option B, they will be entitled to receive a free EagleRider Cloth Patch.  This is not a very cool benefit.  Lets hope you qualify for option A or B. 

A user can download the claim form at the settlement admin portal here.  Please note that Adobe Acrobat (PDF) is needed in order to download the claim form.

Important dates include:

August 22, 2011:  Deadline to request an exclusion from the lawsuit.

September 1, 2011:  The settlement fairness hearing.  If you would like to speak at the fairness hearing you must submit a letter stating so.  Please entitle the letter “Notice of Intention to Appear in Yaakoby v. EagleRider, Inc.” and mail it to: Yaakoby Settlement, c/o Dahl, Inc., P.O. Box 2061, Faribault, MN 55021-2061.  You must include your name, address, phone, detail information about the statement and evidence you plan to present and then sign and date it.

December 19, 2011:  ALL claims forms must be in or postmarked by this date!

GrubHub has some serious lawsuit problems on their hands.  But first what exactly is GrubHub?  In a nutshell they help you find and order food from delivery and pickup restaurants if your located in Chicago, San Fran, Boston, New York, Philly, DC, LA, San Diego, Portland, Seattle or Denver.  A user simply enters their location on the GrubHub.com website and then a list of delivery and pickup restaurants are displayed in that users area.  Sounds like a pretty good service right?  Wrong! 

The GrubHub Hidden Charges Class Action Lawsuit contends the company is violating consumer-fraud statutes because some restaurants charge higher prices to customers without disclosing it to the customer.

This all came about one day when the lead plaintiff in the GrubHub class action lawsuit was charged an additional $1.00 more when a order was made for Fettuccine Alfredo from the Pompei restaurant through GrubHub on September 3rd, 2009. The Fettuccine Alfredo is listed as $8.95 on the Pompei menu, but GrubHub had the meal listed as $9.95 on its online menu!  The problems is that GrubHub’s website said its service is free.

GrubHub features electronic menus that, in some cases, have higher prices than the prices listed in the respective restaurant’s ‘in-house’ menu.  GrubHub denied the allegations and declined to comment.  This news is really sad indeed, GrubHub was one of Chicago’s fastest growing online start up companies.  Surly this lawsuit will stall their momentum at the very least. 

The GrubHub class action lawsuit alleges consumer fraud, common law fraud, deceptive business practices,  breach of contract, fraudulent inducement, and unjust enrichment.  GrubHub mailing address is as follows: 2211 N Elston Suite 400Chicago, IL 60614.  $30 million plus was raised from investors since November.  It is not known exactly how many menus were misrepresented.  Please check back for updates on the
GrubHub Hidden Charges Class Action Lawsuit.

Michaels arts and craft store data theft is now a class action lawsuit and your rights could be effected in your were  a Michaels store customer between February 8 and May 6, 2011.  Thieves obtainedthe personal financial data of thousands of customers by lifting their credit and debit card information from in-store PIN pads.  Customers claim that Michaels did not do enough to protect their privacy and that the popular arts and craft store is in violation of the Federal Stored Communications Act, the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act, and breach of contract. 

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois will have jurisdiction of the Michaels Data Theft Class Action Lawsuit.

The lawsuit states “Based on the email alert, Michaels apparently expects its victimized consumers to bear the fallout form its security breach, thereby thrusting upon the consumers a continuous burden of monitoring their bank accounts and credit histories,”… this lawsuit sounds like a messy one. 

Michaels alerted customers of the potential security breach on May 5th by email.  The email explained that you  “may have been” a victim of PIN-pad tampering and that some customer data “may have been” compromised.  Imagine waking up to that email message…

The Yaz lawsuit just won’t stop…. The Yasmin & Yaz Drospirenone Marketing Sales Class Action Lawsuit complaint makes claims for negligence, strict product liability, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentation, and fraud & deceit.  United States District Court Judge David R. Herndon has granted defendants’ motion to strike the class allegations in plaintiffs’ complaint. 

There are many lawsuit being filed across the country related to Yaz and Yasmin.  Women filing Yaz lawsuits have suffered injuries such as blood clots, pulmonary embolism, stroke, and gallbladder disease, as well as other Yaz side effects.

The Plaintiff in this case is a 44 year woman from Louisiana who was prescribed YAZ in May of 2006 by her physician, Dr. Eugenio C. Labadio.  While taking the product, the plaintiff was hospitalized due to a deep veinthrombosis  in her left leg.  The Plaintiff claims that the deep veinthrombosis (DVT) were caused by her ingestion of YAZ.

A complete copy of the Yasmin & Yaz Drospirenone Marketing Sales Class Action Lawsuit court order can be found here.