≡ Menu

You could get payment from the Washington Mutual Option Adjustable Rate Mortgage ARM Loan class action settlement if you have or had an Option Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loan that was obtained between January 16, 2004 and December 2, 2014, and, among other things, was secured by real property in California, was acquired by Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. or WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp., and serviced by Washington Mutual Bank.

Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp., WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp., BrooksAmerica Mortgage Corporation and Residential Funding Company, LLC (collectively “Defendants”) have reportedly agreed to a proposed settlement of a mortgage class action lawsuit against defendants in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (styled as Peel v. BrooksAmerica Mortgage Corp., et al., Case Number 8:11-cv-00079-JLS (RNBx)) alleging, among other things, that defendants violated the federal Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) and California’s Unfair Competition law (“UCL”) in connection with the sale of Option Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loans by allegedly failing to disclose that by making the minimum monthly loan payments at the beginning of the mortgage loan term the principal balance would increase, resulting in a negative amortization, according to the Washington Mutual class action settlement notice.

Who Is Included In The Washington Mutual Option Adjustable Rate Mortgage ARM Class Action Settlement?

The Washington Mutual settlement class reportedly includes, unless otherwise excluded, all persons who obtained an Option ARM Loan from January 16, 2004, through December 2, 2014:

(a) that was acquired by Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp or WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. (b) that was serviced at any time by Washington Mutual Bank (c) that was secured by real property in the State of California (d) that was not originated by a national bank or a federal savings association, an operating subsidiary of a national bank or a federal savings association; or an affiliate, division, subdivision, predecessor, or parent of Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp or WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. (e) that had following characteristics: (i) the “Interest Rate” paragraph of the Note (Paragraph 2) states both a “yearly” Interest Rate that is less than the index plus the margin; and that the Interest Rate “may” rather than “will” change; (ii) the “Initial Monthly Payment” listed in the Note is based upon the yearly interest rate listed in paragraph 2; and (iii) the Note does not contain any statement that after the first Interest Rate Change Date, paying the amount listed as the “Initial Monthly Payment” “will” result in negative amortization or deferred interest.

What Settlement Benefits Does The Washington Mutual Class Action Settlement Provide?

The Washington Mutual class action settlement reportedly provides, among other things, for the creation of an $10 million settlement fund to pay class members, to pay settlement administration costs, to pay class counsel’s attorneys fees, and to pay incentive awards to the class representatives.  Each class member could reportedly receive between $239 and $716.

Where Can You Obtain More Information About The Washington Mutual Class Action Settlement?

For more information about the Washington Mutual class action settlement call toll free 800-416-4904, or visit the settlement website at wmmscsettlement.com or email the Washington Mutual settlement administrator at wmmsc@angeiongroup.com.

If You Have Thoughts On The Washington Mutual Class Action Settlement, Share Your Washington Mutual Settlement Comments Below.

{ 0 comments }

If You Have a Flushmate III System in Your Toilet, You May Be Eligible for Cash Payments from the Proposed Flushmate III Toilet Class Action Settlement.

Sloan Valve Company (“Sloan”); Flushmate, a division of Sloan(“Flushmate”); AS America, Inc., d/b/a American Standard Brands (“American Standard”); Kohler Co. (“Kohler”); Gerber Plumbing Fixtures, LLC (“Gerber”); Mansfield Plumbing Products, LLC (“Mansfield”); and Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (“Home Depot”) (collectively “Defendants”) have reportedly agreed to a proposed settlement of a consumer class action lawsuit against defendants in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (captioned as United Desert Charities, et. al. v. Sloan Valve Company, et. al., Case No. CV12-06878) alleging, among other things, that the Series 503 Flushmate III Pressure-Assist Flushing System manufactured from October 14, 1997 through June 30, 2009 (“Flushmate System”) is defective and could cause the toilet to leak or burst resulting in injuries and/or property damage, according to the Flushmate III Toilet class action settlement notice.

Who Is Included In The Flushmate Class Action Settlement?

The Flushmate settlement class reportedly includes, unless otherwise excluded any person or entity in the United States who owns or owned a Flushmate System installed in the United States.

What Settlement Benefits Does The Flushmate Class Action Settlement Provide?

The Flushmate class action settlement reportedly provides, among other things, for the creation of an $18 million settlement fund  from which Class Members can file claims to receive reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses incurred for having installed: (1) a Flushmate Repair Kit, (2) a replacement pressure vessel, and/or (3) a replacement toilet, as well as reimbursement for any direct property damage caused by Flushmate Systems that leaked or burst.

Where Can You Obtain More Information About The Flushmate III Toilet Class Action Settlement?

For more information about the Flushmate III Toilet settlement, write to Flushmate Settlement, P.O. Box 1272, Lancaster, CA 93584, call toll free 1-877-412-5277 or visit the settlement website at www.flushmateclaims.com or email the Flush mate settlement administrator at info@flushmateclaims.com.

If You Have Thoughts On The Flushmate III Toilet Class Action Settlement, Share Your Flushmate Class Action Settlement Comments Below.

{ 0 comments }

If you purchased flax milk sold in the US by Flax USA, Inc., you may be entitled to compensation under the Flax Milk class action settlement.

Flax USA Inc. (“Flax”) has reportedly agreed to a proposed settlement of a consumer class action lawsuit against Flax in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (captioned as Garo Madenlian, et al. v. Flax USA, Inc., Case No. SACV13-01748 JVS (JPRx) alleging, among other things, that Flax sold three flavors of aseptic (i.e., shelf-stable, non-refrigerated) flax milk in 32-oz size cartons (unsweetened, vanilla and original flavors) that contained the words “All Natural Dairy Free Beverage*” which representation Plaintiffs alleged was false, according to the Flax milk class action settlement notice.

Who Is Included In The Flax Milk Class Action Settlement?

The Flax milk settlement class reportedly includes:

All persons in the United States who purchased any of the Products (i.e., the three flavors of aseptic – i.e., shelf-stable, non-refrigerated- flax milk in 32-oz size cartons: unsweetened, vanilla and original flavors) during the Settlement Class Period (which is from November 5, 2009, to September 22, 2014).

Excluded from the Flax milk settlement Class are: (a) Defendant’s employees, officers and directors; (b) Class Counsel and its employees, officers and directors; (c) Defendant’s Counsel and its partners, employees, officers and directors; (d) Persons who purchased the Products for the intended or actual use of distribution, re-sale or donation; (e) Persons who timely and properly exclude themselves from the Settlement Class; and (f) the Court, the Court’s immediate family, and Court staff.

What Settlement Benefits Does The Flax Milk Class Action Settlement Provide?

The Flax milk class action settlement reportedly provides, among other things, that class members can file claims to recover reimbursement of $2.50 per carton for every Product they purchased during the Settlement Class Period (up to a maximum of 10 cartons per claimant or address) or reimbursement of $3.25 per carton for every Product they purchased during the Settlement Class Period (up to a maximum of 10 cartons per claimant or address) for which they indicate on the Claim Form the name of the retailer where they purchased the Product and the city and state where that retailer is located.

Where Can You Obtain More Information About The Flax Milk Class Action Settlement?

For more information about the Flax milk settlement, write to Flax Milk Settlement Claims Administrator at Flax Milk Litigation Settlement, c/o Gilardi & Co. LLC, P.O. Box 8060, San Rafael, CA 94912-8060, call toll free 888-283-7973 or visit the settlement website at www.flaxmilksettlement.com or email the Flax settlement administrator at info@flaxmilksettlement.com

If You Have Thoughts On The Flax Milk Class Action Settlement, Share Your Flax Class Action Settlement Comments Below.

{ 0 comments }

Mazda 3 and Mazda 6 Car Owners File Class Action Lawsuit Complaint Against Mazda Over Allegedly Defective Dashboards.

Mazda Motor Corporation and Mazda Motor of America Inc. (“Mazda” or “Defendants”), have reportedly been named as defendants in a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (styled Danielle Stedman, Gary Soto and Jody Soto v. Mazda Motor Corporation and Mazda Motor of America Inc., Case No.  8-14-cv-01608) alleging, among other things, that Mazda sold 2009-2011 model year Mazda 3 and Mazda 6 vehicles with dashboards that allegedly do not withstand exposure to sunlight, melt, crack, emit a noxious chemical smell, and have a reflective quality according to the Mazda class action lawsuit complaint.

The proposed Mazda class action lawsuit is reportedly brought on behalf of the following nationwide putative class members:

“All persons in the United States who owned or leased a Class Vehicle.”

Class vehicles include 2009 through 2011 Mazda 3 and Mazda 6 cars.  The suit is also reportedly brought on behalf of a Florida subclass consisting of persons who purchased or leased a 2009 through 2011 Mazda 3 and Mazda 6 in Florida.

The Mazda class action lawsuit complaint reportedly asserts legal claims for, among other things, alleged violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law California Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq., California’s Legal Remedies Act, Cal. Civ. Code. §§ 1750, et seq., negligence,  the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Fla. Stat. § 501.201, et seq., and unjust enrichment.

The Plaintiffs and the putative class members in the Mazda class action law suit reportedly seek, among other things, an order certifying the case as a class action, an order awarding actual, statutory and punitive damages, restitution, disgorgement and other equitable relief, an order requiring Mazda to allegedly adequately disclose and repair the alleged defect in the dashboard, interest, and an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and other litigation costs.

If You Have Thoughts On The Mazda Dashboard Class Action Lawsuit, Share Your Mazda Class Action Lawsuit Comments Below.

{ 0 comments }

If you bought retail Red Bull products in the United States between January 1, 2002 and October 3, 2014, you may be entitled to a payment from the Red Bull class action settlement.

Red Bull North America, Inc., Red Bull Distribution Company, Inc. and Red Bull Gmb (“Red Bull”) have reportedly agreed to a proposed settlement of two consumer class action lawsuits against them in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (captioned as Benjamin Careathers v. Red Bull North America, Inc., Case No. 1:13-CV-00369 (KPF); and Wolf, et al. v. Red Bull GmbH, et al., Case No. 1:13-CV-08008 (KPF)) alleging, among other things, that RedBull’s marketing and labeling of certain RedBull energy drinks misrepresents both the functionality and safety of the Red Bull beverages, according to the Red Bull energy drink class action settlement notice.

Who Is Included In The Red Bull Class Action Settlement?

The Red Bull settlement class reportedly includes, unless otherwise excluded, all persons who made at least one purchase of RedBull products in the United States between January 1, 2002 and October 3, 2014.

What Settlement Benefits Does The Red Bull Class Action Settlement Provide?

The Red Bull class action settlement reportedly provides, among other things, that Red Bull will create a settlement fund of $13 million from which class members can file claim forms requesting a cash reimbursement of $10 or free redbull products (RedBull Energy Drink or RedBull Sugarfree) with a retail value of $15.  In addition, the Red Bull class action provides that Red Bull has updated its marketing materials to address concerns raised by the Red Bull lawsuit.

Where Can You Obtain More Information About The Red Bull Class Action Settlement?

For more information about the Red Bull settlement, write to Energy Drink Settlement c/o GCG, P.O. Box 35123, Seattle, WA 98124-5123, call 877- 495-1568, email the Red Bull settlement administrator at energydrinksettlement@gcginc.com or visit the Red Bull class action settlement website at www.energydrinksettlement.com.

If You Have Thoughts On The Red Bull Class Action Settlement, Share Your Red Bull Class Action Settlement Comments Below.

{ 1 comment }

If You Bought, Received or Acquired a KitchenAid Brand Stand Mixer Marketed With A Horsepower Designation, You May Be Entitled to Benefits From The KitchenAid Class Action Lawsuit Settlement.

Whirlpool Corporation has reportedly agreed to a proposed settlement of a consumer class action lawsuit against it in the 11th Judicial Circuit Court in Miami-Dade Florida (captioned as Stuart Bornstein v. Whirlpool Corporation, Case No. 12-1532 CA 42) alleging, among other things, that Whirlpool over-stated the horsepower of certain 6-qt., 7-qt., and 8-qt. KitchenAid -brand stand mixers manufactured by Whirlpool and marketed with a horsepower designation, purportedly in violation of consumer protection statutes and in breach of express warranty, according to the KitchenAid stand mixer horsepower class action settlement notice.

Who Is Included In The KitchenAid Class Action Settlement?

The KitchenAid mixer settlement class reportedly includes, unless otherwise excluded, all persons in the United States and its territories who before June 18, 2014 either (1) purchased a Mixer or (2) received a Mixer as a gift or (3) acquired possession of a Mixer through other lawful means.

What Settlement Benefits Does The KitchenAid Class Action Settlement Provide?

The KitchenAid stand mixer class action settlement reportedly provides, among other things, that Whirlpool will change its records to extend the written warranty two years for all covered KitchenAid mixers and will provide on its website and in marketing materials that reference horsepower the following statement:

“Motor horsepower for our mixer motors was measured using a dynamometer, a machine laboratories routinely use to measure the mechanical power of motors. Our 1.3 horsepower (HP) motor reference reflects the horsepower rating of the motor itself and not the mixer’s horsepower output to the mixer bowl. This robust motor, the backbone of our new mixer, delivers .44 HP to the bowl enabling your mixer to deliver consistent power to small and large loads with less heat build-up; resulting in years of dependable mixing. When combined with and guided by our new advanced motor control board, this is our longest lasting and most efficient motor yet. Simply put, our new, highly efficient, special purpose motor delivers the power you need when you need it.”

Where Can You Obtain More Information About The KitchenAid Class Action Settlement?

For more information about the KitchenAid settlement, write to the  Bornstein v. Whirlpool settlement administrator  at P.O. Box 43281, Providence, RI 02940-3281, or visit the KitchenAid settlement website at www.mixersettlement.com.

If You Have Thoughts On The KitchenAid Class Action Settlement, Share Your KitchenAid Class Action Settlement Comments Below.

{ 1 comment }

If You Purchased A Lenova Ideapad Ultrabook Computer Laptop model U310 or U410, Your Rights May Be Affected By The Lenova Class Action Settlement.

Lenovo (United States), Inc. has reportedly agreed to a settlement of a consumer class action lawsuit filed against Lenovo in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (styled as Kaesuta, et al. v. Lenovo (United States) Inc., Case No. SACV 13-00316-CJC (RNBx) alleging, among other things, that Lenovo sold certain Ultrabook computers that had a design defect that affected the Wi-Fi performance of the computers, according to the Lenovo class action settlement notice.

The Lenovo Ultrabook Ideapad Laptop Computer Wi-Fi class action settlement reportedly includes, unless otherwise excluded, people who bought either a Lenovo Ideapad model U310 computer or Lenovo Ideapad model U410 computer.

The Lenovo class action settlement reportedly provides that class members who file valid claims can elect to recover a cash refund of $100 or a $250 credit certificate towards the purchase of products on Lenovo.com.  Alternatively, Lenovo class action settlement members who have not previously returned the Lenovo computer for repair of the wireless capability and who wish to have it repaired due to persistent Wi-Fi connectivity issues, can file claims to have their Lenovo repaired at no cost.  Lenovo settlement class members can also file claims to recover reimbursement of out of pocket expenses incurred to repair their Wi-Fi problems.  Lenovo settlement class members who file valid claims may also have the warranty on their Lenovo computer extended.

For more information about the Lenovo class action settlement, write the Lenovo class action settlement Administrator at Lenovo Laptop Wi-Fi Settlement c/o Berdon Claims Administration LLC, P.O. Box 9014 Jericho, NY 11753-8914, call the Lenovo settlement administrator at (800) 605-2008, fax them at (516) 931-0810 or email the Lenovo settlement administrator at lenovosettlement@berdonclaims.com or visit the Lenovo settlement website at www.lenovolaptopwifisettlement.com.

If You Have Thoughts On The Lenovo Settlement, Share Your Lenovo Ideapad Ultrabook Laptop Computer WiFi Connectivity Class Action Settlement Comments Below.

{ 0 comments }

If You Bought or Paid For Celexa Between January 1, 1998 and December 31, 2013 or Lexapro Between August 1, 2002 and December 31, 2013, You May be Eligible for Payment in the Lexapro Class Action & Celexa Class Action Settlement.

Forest Laboratories, Inc. and Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Defendants”) have reportedly agreed to a settlement of a consumer class action lawsuit filed against them in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (styled as In re Celexa and Lexapro Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, No. 09–MD–2067 (NMG). ) alleging, among other things, that Defendants violated the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act in connection with the marketing and sale of Celexa and Lexapro, prescription drugs used to treat depression, for use by minors, according to the Celexa class action and Lexapro class action settlement notice.

The Celexa class action and Lexapro class action settlement reportedly includes, unless otherwise excluded, those individuals who purchased or paid for branded Celexa® or Lexapro® for use by a Minor under the age of 18 between January 1, 1998 and December 31, 2013, and if either (i) Celexa® or Lexapro® was prescribed to the Minor in Missouri; or (ii) the prescription was purchased in Missouri; or (iii) the individual or minor was a domiciliary citizen of Missouri at the time of the prescription or purchase.  The Lexapro and Celexa class action settlement also include those entities or third party payors who purchased, paid for, or made a reimbursement for branded Celexa® or Lexapro® for use by a Minor under the age of 18 between January 1, 1998 and December 31, 2013, and if either (i) Celexa or Lexapro was prescribed to the Minor in Missouri or (ii) the Minor was a domiciliary citizen of Missouri at the time of the prescription or payment.

The Celexa Lexapro class action settlement reportedly provides that a settlement fund of between $7.65 million to $10.35 will be created to pay valid claims, attorney fees, incentive awards, costs, and expenses associated with administering the settlement.

Celexa and Lexapro class action participants who file valid claim forms may be entitled to recover a payment in connection with their purchase or reimbursement of a purchase of branded Celexa or Lexapro for use by a minor.

For more information about the Lexapro Celexa class action settlement, write the  Celexa Lexapro class action settlement Administrator at Celexa and Lexapro Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, P.O. Box 5110, Portland, OR 97208-5110, call 1-877-772-6154 or visit the Celexa Lexapro class action settlement website at www.Pediatric-Antidepressant-MissouriSettlement.com

If You Have Thoughts On The Lexapro Celexa Class Action Settlement, Share Your Celexa Lexapro Class Action Settlement Comments Below.

{ 1 comment }