Safe Melt Lawsuit Alleges Ice-Melting Salt Is Far From ‘Pet Safe’ as Advertised

A proposed class action lawsuit claims that the Safe Melt ice- and snow-melting salt sold by P.F. Harris Manufacturing Company, LLC and PurposeBuilt Brands, Inc. is falsely advertised as safe for pets, given that the magnesium chloride product is highly toxic to animals. 

The 28-page false advertising lawsuit contends that although the defendants market and sell the Safe Melt salt with prominent red labels emphasizing that the product is “Pet Safe” and appropriate for use around animals, the magnesium chloride salt can cause “gastrointestinal irritation, diarrhea, bloody vomiting, respiratory depression, kidney failure and cardiac arrest” in pets who ingest it. The Safe Melt salt can also cause “chemical burns, cracked paw pads, and painful irritation” should it become embedded in pets’ fur or come into direct contact with skin, the case alleges.

According to the filing, the defendants have misled consumers by failing to clarify that the Safe Melt ice-melting salt is “pet safe” in only one, narrow way.

“Safe Melt comes in round pellets—not jagged crystals like other ice-melting salts—meaning pets are less likely to cut their paws when walking over it,” the class action lawsuit says, stressing that consumers “overwhelmingly”—and incorrectly—believe the product is harmless for pets to touch and consume.

Ultimately, P.F. Harris Manufacturing Company and PurposeBuilt Brands are “misleading consumers into believing Safe Melt has characteristics it lacks,” and charging a premium price for a decidedly non-pet-safe product, the complaint alleges.

“This must stop,” the suit says. “And Defendants must take responsibility for the harm they have caused.”

“Pet Safe” ice melt is not actually safe for animals, lawsuit claims

Ice-melting salts are among the bevy of products, such as food, toys and supplements, for which consumers are willing to pay a premium to keep their pets safe, the filing shares. Per the case, 43 percent of pet owners, for instance, admit that they give higher priority to obtaining healthy food for their pets than for themselves. Broadly, pet safety is among the highest priorities for consumers when it comes to determining which toys, foods, treats or supplements they buy for their pets, the suit stresses.

Pet owners’ commitment to safety extends to their purchase of ice- and snow-melting salts that won’t irritate or injure their pets, and consumers reasonably rely on product packaging and labeling when making purchasing decisions, the lawsuit says. Because consumers prefer pet-safe melting salts, companies are able to charge “substantial premiums” for such products, the suit relays.

According to the complaint, the “Pet Safe” and “Pet Friendly” labels on the Safe Melt and Kind Melt salts are extremely misleading to consumers, given that the product is made entirely of magnesium chloride.

The class action lawsuit says that pets can suffer an array of harmful symptoms, including those listed above, from ingesting even a small amount of a magnesium chloride ice-melter.

“This may occur if a pet simply ‘licks their paws after a winter walk’ over an ice-melting product,” the complaint says, adding that pets licking paws that touched ice-melting salt is one of the most common reasons behind calls to an animal poison control center.

“Pets commonly walk over those products, roll around on them, lick them off the ground, roll around on them, lick them off the ground, eat snow treated with the products, or lap up liquid or slush including the products,” the filing stresses.

Even if the product is not ingested, the suit continues, magnesium chloride ice-melting salt is nevertheless “dangerous for pets to touch,” as the product may cause chemical burns, cracking and bleeding of the paws, and painful skin irritation.

In fact, the case says that veterinarians advise pet owners to rinse their pets’ paws after walking over ice melt and to “immediately” head to an emergency animal care provider should they suspect that their pet ingested the salt.

“Even though consumption of Safe Melt and Kind Melt can seriously harm pets, the containers and sales webpages for those products have never warned consumers that the products are unsafe for pets to ingest,” the lawsuit reiterates.

Class action lawsuit says makers knew for years that Safe Melt was not safe for pets

According to the class action suit, P.F. Harris has known since at least September 2019 that Safe Melt and Kind Melt were not safe for use around pets.

The filing mentions that the company created a Safety Data Sheet (SDS) concerning the product, which lists known hazards and “appropriate” protective measures. Per the suit, the SDS for Safe Melt unequivocally states that “[t]his material is considered hazardous by the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard,” and lists a “series” of potential side effects if the product is exposed to skin or ingested.

The lawsuit stresses that P.F. Harris, as the manufacturer, conducted research into potential safety concerns, which should have made it clear to the company the health hazards associated with the product.  In fact, the suit claims that P.F. Harris “has always omitted” pertinent warnings for consumers, even though employees are able to see that the SDS sheet recommends “[s]tore only in original container, in a dry place inaccessible to children and pets.”

The case adds that PurposeBuilt should have become aware of the dangers of Safe Melt and Kind Melt upon its purchase of P.F. Harris in September 2024, namely through the standard due diligence involved in buying a company that makes and/or sells chemical products.

Plaintiffs say Safe Melt led to injuries, death

The suit states that both plaintiffs purchased Safe Melt in reasonable reliance on the “Pet Safe” claim and understood it to mean that the ice melt would not hurt their pets if touched or ingested.

The case highlights that one plaintiff, who fosters disabled and special needs dogs, noticed that one of her pups’ paws became “red and inflamed” and developed “painful” ulcers after she used Safe Melt around her home. The lawsuit states that the ulcers looked like “serious red blisters that had popped” and caused her dog “significant discomfort.” It was only after she had purchased Safe Melt multiple times that the plaintiff realized the product was the source of her dogs’ health problem, the suit says.

The second plaintiff purchased Safe Melt believing it was safe for his dog, the lawsuit states; however, after sprinkling the ice melt around his driveway and sidewalk, his dog Ruby developed kidney disease and later died of kidney failure, the complaint says.

Both named plaintiffs were willing to pay a premium for products that were safe for use around pets, the case states. Had they known Safe Melt was dangerous to animals, they would not have paid a premium price for the salt, or purchased it at all, the lawsuit asserts.

Who is covered by the Safe Melt class action lawsuit?

The Salt Melt class action lawsuit looks to represent all individuals in the United States who purchased Safe Melt or Kind Melt at any time within the applicable statute of limitations period.

How can I sign up for the P.F. Harris class action lawsuit?

Generally, you don’t need to do anything to join or sign up for a class action lawsuit when it is initially filed. Should the case be resolved by a class action settlement, the settlement class—the people covered by the deal—will receive a notice outlining the terms of the settlement and their options and legal rights going forward.

Keep in mind that some class action lawsuits can take years to settle.

If you’ve purchased Safe Melt or Kind Melt, or just want to stay informed on class action lawsuit and class action settlement news, sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.

Check out ClassAction.org’s free legal resources to learn how to file a class action lawsuit.