Matrix Biolage Keratindose Products Contain No Keratin, Lawsuit Says
Last Updated on April 8, 2019
Investigation Complete
Attorneys working with ClassAction.org have finished their investigation into this matter. Check back for any potential updates. You can also sign up for our free newsletter for the latest in class action news and settlements.
If you still have questions about your rights, contact an attorney in your area as there is a time limit for filing all lawsuits. The information on this page was posted when the investigation began and is now for reference only.
Free Consumer Tools:
- Open and Current Class Action Lawsuit Settlements and Rebates
- Open and Current Class Action Lawsuit List, Investigations
- Class Action Lawsuit and Settlement News
- Free Class Action Lawsuit Database
Case Update
April 8, 2019
At this point, attorneys working with ClassAction.org no longer need to hear from people who purchased the Matrix Biolage Keratindose products. A class action lawsuit is currently making its way through the court system. We will update this page if a settlement is reached or if the case gets dismissed. Keep in mind that you don’t need to do anything to join a class action lawsuit. You can view our open investigations here.
At A Glance
- This Alert Affects:
- Anyone who purchased Matrix Biolage Keratindose shampoo, conditioner or renewal spray.
- What’s Going On?
- L’Oreal USA and Matrix Essentials are facing a class action lawsuit alleging their “Keratindose” products contain no keratin at all.
- How Could a Class Action Help?
- A class action lawsuit, if successful, could help consumers get back the money they spent on Keratindose products.
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Matrix Essentials and L’Oreal alleging that their “Keratindose” products – despite advertised claims – contain no keratin at all and therefore cannot provide their promised benefits.
The products named in the lawsuit are:
- Matrix Biolage Keratindose Pro-Keratin + Silk Shampoo
- Matrix Biolage Keratindose Pro-Keratin + Silk Conditioner
- Matrix Biolage Keratindose Pro-Keratin + Silk Renewal Spray
What Claims Does the Lawsuit Make?
The lawsuit claims that Matrix and L’Oreal broke the law when they employed a marketing campaign designed to trick consumers into thinking the Keratindose products actually contain keratin and can provide the associated benefits.
It all starts with the products’ branding. The suit claims that naming the system “Keratindose” is deceptive in and of itself as the name implies that the products do indeed contain keratin. Further, the companies advertise that their “keratin treatment” could restore over-processed hair and make hair “90% more conditioned” after just one treatment. The products, however, are “incapable” of providing these benefits, the suit says, because of the lack of actual keratin in the formula.
According to the suit, Matrix and L’Oreal’s false representations were intentional and made in an effort to stimulate sales and increase profits.
Consumers never would have bought the products, the suit says, or would not have paid as much had they known that there was no keratin in the “Keratindose” three-step system.
Keratindose “Treatment” Caused Brittle Hair, Hair Loss
The lawsuit claims that without keratin, the Keratindose system is essentially “worthless” and that some customers were even worse off after using the products. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit claim that the Keratindose products actually damaged their hair, causing it to become brittle and dry. One plaintiff needed to pay for conditioning treatment to fix her damaged hair, while the other suffered hair loss after using the products.
How Can a Class Action Help?
If successful, a class action lawsuit could help customers get back some of the money they paid for the Keratindose shampoo, conditioner and renewal spray. Further, the court could order that Matrix and L’Oreal change the way they brand and advertise their products.
It’s important to keep your receipts and the products themselves if you still have them!
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.