Hoang Tran Nov. 12, 2015, 11:13am


SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Legal Newsline) – The makers of Wonder Wax are being sued over claims that the product is misleading and does not offer painless hair removal.

Plaintiffs Audra Hudson, Pamela Williams and Natoya Johnson, on behalf of themselves and those similarly situated, filed a class action lawsuit on Nov. 2 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California against Ontel Products Corp. over claims that they violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Georgia Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the Georgia Fair Business Practices Act, the California Legal Remedies Act, California Civil Code, the California Unfair Competition Law and the California False Advertising Law.

According to the complaint, the defendant's claims that the wax is a safe, effective way to remove hair are allegedly deceptive and misleading and have been designed solely to cause consumers to buy Wonder Wax. The plaintiffs allege that Wonder Wax is a worthless product, uniformly failing to provide the results promised. The plaintiffs argue that the product actually is dangerous and has caused injuries to numerous consumers.

They are demanding a trial by jury and are seeking restitution and disgorgement of all amounts obtained by defendant as a result of its misconduct; all recoverable compensatory and other damages sustained by plaintiffs and the class; actual and statutory damages for injuries suffered by plaintiffs and the classes and in the maximum amount permitted by applicable law; an order requiring defendant to immediately cease its wrongful conduct; enjoining defendant from continuing to misrepresent and conceal material information and conduct business via the unlawful, unfair and deceptive business acts and practices complained of herein; an order requiring defendant to engage in a corrective notice campaign; an order requiring defendant to pay to plaintiffs and all members of the classes the amounts paid for the Wonder Wax; statutory pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on any amounts; court and attorney costs; and any other rewards deemed just by the courts.

They are being represented by James Shah, Rose F. Luzon, and Kolin Tang of Shephard, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLP in San Diego, California and Marc A. Wites at Wites & Kapetan, P.A., in Lighthouse Point, Florida.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California case number 2:15-cv-02264-JAM-CKD

More News