The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the EPA both regulate flea and tick products for pets, but the difference is that for controlling animal drugs, the responsibility falls on the FDA.įor ones that need to regulate external parasites, it becomes EPA’s responsibility. People who own pets have all the right to choose what products are good for their pets, and with the help of a veterinarian’s opinion, that choice becomes clearer.Īlthough there are times that owners go for a particular product based on word of mouth and if it is readily available in reputable groceries or stores.Īmong these products are flea and tick items, where the choices range from pills to sprays, dips, shampoos, and powders. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) routinely regulated various products based on how they can affect the environment, and in regards to the ones named in the case, they have seen a rise in irreparable damages because of them. Products that were named in the case included Hartz Ultraguard flea and tick drops and Vectra 3d by Summit VetPharm.Īmong the complaints were negligence, violation of New Jersey’s consumer fraud law, and liability for manufacturing a hazardous product. Most notable lawsuits then were filed against Hartz Mountain and Summit VetPharm, where allegations cite the flea or tick treatments products by the two manufacturers have Pyrethrin, or a different version of Pyrethroids, which may poison animals.
#Class actio lawsuit pyrethrins series
In 2010, Hartz was among the companies charged with a series of lawsuits as the plaintiffs’ pets became sick when they used the products made and sold by the defendants. He felt that justice has finally been served.
The jury’s decision was the closure Bowers was looking for as Diesel’s passing was an emotional time for him. It took less than 30 minutes for the jury to unanimously decide in favor of the plaintiff, considered as the underdog in the court battle.
#Class actio lawsuit pyrethrins pro
One Hartz lawsuit was considered a landmark decision against one of the country’s leading manufacturers of pet care items and may have been the starting point of the debate about the safety issues of topical fees and treatment for ticks.Ī Texas jury decided for Frank Bowers in a small claims court action that he filed against Hartz Mountain Corporation, and he got $4,440.75.Ĭonsidering the defendant’s magnitude, people believed it was a David versus Goliath battle as Bowers claimed the company’s Ultraguard Pro Flea and Tick Drops was the reason Diesel, his beloved English Bulldog, died. Hartz has been targeted before in 2009 and the years after, but the complaints seem to never end. Hartz Class Action Lawsuit – Multiple Complaints By Pet Owners Some pets do not have any adverse reactions, but those who do often end up in death. Unfortunately, some pet owners are not aware of the issue and uses Hartz products such as the Ultraguard flea and tick drops on their pets.
Several complaints have risen online, warning people of the brand. Since 2009, Hartz has been in hot water with various lawsuits filed against them because of their products. Sometimes, people make sure they also use what’s best for their pets when bathing or daily care.īut there are cases that even if we choose the best ones for them, something comes up and makes people regret the decisions they’ve made.
We often treat our pets as if they’re our kids, making sure they have the best of everything we can provide: nutrition, medical care, toys, or even clothes.
Class Actions Hartz Class Action Lawsuit – Flea and Tick Shampoo Leads To Deathīy Consider The Consumer on Everything You Need To Know About Hartz Pet Products
0 kommentar(er)
