In this issue, we’re taking a look at the recent $141 million settlement between Intuit (the company behind TurboTax) and the attorneys general of all 50 states. The settlement resolves claims that millions of taxpayers were tricked into paying for TurboTax when they didn’t need to. From there, we’ll touch on the allegedly illegal biometric collection practices of Snapchat, a lawsuit filed against Walgreens over Marlboro Menthol cigarettes, and a case filed over the ingredients in certain Ricola cough drops. We have new and expiring settlements down below as well. Keep reading for the latest.
With tax season wrapped up for the year, an investigation into TurboTax is also concluding. On May 4, it was announced that Intuit had agreed with the attorneys general of all 50 states to pay $141 million for allegedly tricking millions of taxpayers into paying to file their taxes when they were eligible to do so for free. Intuit’s agreement with the attorneys general will provide direct payments of roughly $30 to nearly 4.4 million consumers for each year that they were told they had to pay for TurboTax’s services even though they were eligible to file their taxes for free. There’s nothing you need to do to get a payment from the settlement; payments will automatically be sent to those covered. Intuit has been asked to provide records of its customers’ names and addresses so those covered by the settlement can be contacted. You should expect to receive an email and mailed notice with information about the settlement, and reminders to cash your check after it’s been issued. You can read up on all the details here.
The company behind Snapchat, a social media app that allows users to communicate through short videos and images called “snaps,” is the latest to be hit with a lawsuit over the collection of biometric data. According to the proposed class action, Snapchat collects, stores and shares Illinois users’ unique facial features and voices without first providing required disclosures on how the information will be used and for how long. The company also fails to obtain a written release authorizing the collection of users’ private information as required by the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, the suit alleges. As with the bulk of these types of cases, the suit looks to cover Illinois residents specifically, as the state’s law is the only one so far that allows private citizens to sue for alleged biometric infractions. Want more? Our write-up of the case can be found on this page.
Our settlements page is always being updated. Have you checked to see if you're covered by any open settlements? You can also check out the latest settlements as they happen by following us on Twitter.
If you owned a Sole treadmill in Ohio or Minnesota between August 30, 2015 and February 21, 2022 or in the rest of the United States between December 2, 2017 and February 21, 2022, you may be covered by this settlement.
A recently filed proposed class action is alleging that Walgreens misrepresented Marlboro Menthol cigarettes as “ordinary” cigarettes when they’re actually more harmful and addictive than any other type of cigarette on the market. The suit claims that consumers purchased Marlboro Menthols from Walgreens with the expectation that they were “conventional cigarettes” and with no warning that they were “unreasonably dangerous” and “excessively addictive.” According to the complaint, numerous studies have shown that menthol increases the appeal of tobacco and facilitates addiction, particularly among young people, because the minty, cooling flavor masks the unpleasant flavors and harshness of tobacco products, making them easier to start using. You can check out all the allegations here.
You may have seen Ricola’s “Made with Swiss Alpine Herbs” cough drops and assumed they would provide a good herbal remedy for stopping that pesky cough. But a recently filed lawsuit is claiming that Ricola has been misleading its customers when it comes to the source of the product’s therapeutic qualities. According to the suit, menthol is the only active ingredient in the cough drops, and the various herbs prominently displayed on the product’s packaging are all inactive ingredients responsible for none of the product’s effects. The case charges that although competitor products contain ingredients that are “substantially similar” to those in the Ricola cough drops, only Ricola’s product packaging “conveys the message that its herbal ingredients are responsible for the cough suppressant and oral anesthetic properties it provides.” You can read up on all the details here.
~ Forward to a friend ~
Know someone who might be interested in our newsletter? Why not forward this email to them?