Beauty

[Sweet_Serenity]

[Andreatoo]

---

@jaxs mom wrote:

---

@Andreatoo wrote:

I don't believe it. No court is awarding damages for a temoporary condition even if it is proven to be the Wen, which hasn't happened...

---

It's a settlement, which means that the plaintiffs and defense came to an agreement out of court, in this case which included a financial damage award. It was presented to the court for their approval. Guthy Renker and Wen by Chaz Dean INC are both plaintiffs in the suit, and could have not settled, if they'd wanted to. 

Frankly I'm disappointed that they have chosen to settle. I'd have rather seen it go to court and forced the plaintiffs to prove their case. Because I don't think they could have. But it is what it is. 

---

@jaxs mom

If this is the case it sets a horrible precedent! More frivolous lawsuits on the horizon!

To earn 'damages' one must prove real, PERMANENT, damages.

Not 'my hair fell out and grew back'

The Plaintiffs found  some scheister personal injury attorney that took the case on contingency.....Chaz can't afford to keep up....

 for those of you that think this is an admission of guilt or responsibility; it isn't. It's quite simply bullying.

[Lipstickdiva]

Damages don't have to be permanent.  And trust me, I worked on a class action lawsuit. You have to get certified by the Court as a class and that doesn't happen all that easily. That takes a lot of work and it is a huge financial output by firms to do class actions.  Not to mention, they are a pain to deal with.  One plaintiff is bad enough.  Imagine having hundreds or even thousands.

Again, this isn't necessarily a matter of an allergic reaction to a product.  This could be a matter of certain ingrediants being harmful.  Some will have a reaction to a harmful ingrediant and some won't.

Look at the baby powder lawsuit.  Not every single person who used baby powder will be diagnosed with ovarian cancer.  The ones who are diagnosed aren't having an allergic reaction to the baby powder.

There are lawsuits all the time over medications that have caused problems, complications and even death.  Again, those people aren't having an allergic reaction to the medication.

This very may well be the same thing. If you didn't have any type of reaction, count your blessings. But don't discount those who did as having some sort of allergic reaction but you really don't know. 

Most, if not all, personal injuries are done on a contingency basis. 

[sugar plum]

For those of you who want more information about what is really happening you can find it here: http://people.com/style/wen-hair-care-lawsuit-moves-forward/

Also, if you read the comments from users (at the bottom) you'll see there's more to it than meets the eye.

It helps for the consumer to be informed.

[ellaphant]

---

@Andreatoo wrote:

I don't believe it. No court is awarding damages for a temoporary condition even if it is proven to be the Wen, which hasn't happened...

---

Huh?? Did you read the article? And the condition is hardly 'temporary.'

That said, I wouldn't pay his ridiculous price for no results- I see the same models Chaz uses when he is on QVC-  having prepped their hair for hours I am sure - when he is not around,....Kate and others' hair looks faded and dry! Give me  a break!

[jaxs mom]

---

@Andreatoo wrote:

---

@jaxs mom wrote:

---

@Andreatoo wrote:

I don't believe it. No court is awarding damages for a temoporary condition even if it is proven to be the Wen, which hasn't happened...

---

It's a settlement, which means that the plaintiffs and defense came to an agreement out of court, in this case which included a financial damage award. It was presented to the court for their approval. Guthy Renker and Wen by Chaz Dean INC are both plaintiffs in the suit, and could have not settled, if they'd wanted to. 

Frankly I'm disappointed that they have chosen to settle. I'd have rather seen it go to court and forced the plaintiffs to prove their case. Because I don't think they could have. But it is what it is. 

---

@jaxs mom

If this is the case it sets a horrible precedent! More frivolous lawsuits on the horizon!

To earn 'damages' one must prove real, PERMANENT, damages.

Not 'my hair fell out and grew back'

The Plaintiffs found  some scheister personal injury attorney that took the case on contingency.....Chaz can't afford to keep up....

 for those of you that think this is an admission of guilt or responsibility; it isn't. It's quite simply bullying.

---

If contingency cases were illegal a lot of legitimate lawsuits would never go forward because only the rich could afford to bring their case to trial. The average person can't afford the money it takes to bring a case to trial.

[Buck-i-Nana]

---

@jaxs mom wrote:

---

@Puppy Lips wrote:

What about new, unknowing customers who use the product and have a bad reaction?  Can the company ever be sued again?

---

I seriously doubt it, because one of the complaints sued for failure to warn and I bet a warning to not use if you have a negative reaction will be appearing on bottles in the future. 

---

@jaxs mom - Actually it's already on the bottles and has been for at least a year.

[Andreatoo]

---

@jaxs mom wrote:

---

@Andreatoo wrote:

---

@jaxs mom wrote:

---

@Andreatoo wrote:

I don't believe it. No court is awarding damages for a temoporary condition even if it is proven to be the Wen, which hasn't happened...

---

It's a settlement, which means that the plaintiffs and defense came to an agreement out of court, in this case which included a financial damage award. It was presented to the court for their approval. Guthy Renker and Wen by Chaz Dean INC are both plaintiffs in the suit, and could have not settled, if they'd wanted to. 

Frankly I'm disappointed that they have chosen to settle. I'd have rather seen it go to court and forced the plaintiffs to prove their case. Because I don't think they could have. But it is what it is. 

---

@jaxs mom

If this is the case it sets a horrible precedent! More frivolous lawsuits on the horizon!

To earn 'damages' one must prove real, PERMANENT, damages.

Not 'my hair fell out and grew back'

The Plaintiffs found  some scheister personal injury attorney that took the case on contingency.....Chaz can't afford to keep up....

 for those of you that think this is an admission of guilt or responsibility; it isn't. It's quite simply bullying.

---

If contingency cases were illegal a lot of legitimate lawsuits would never go forward because only the rich could afford to bring their case to trial. The average person can't afford the money it takes to bring a case to trial.

---

@jaxs mom

Who said anything about making contingency illegal? I'm simply pointing out the obvious: It will cost Chaz LESS to settle than to continue on with the mounting legal fees...

[Tinkrbl44]

Okay .......  I just read the article and nowhere does it say that any of the claimants provided ANY medical documentation that it was, in fact, the Wen CC that caused the problem!    (Thyroid deficiencies are a common reason for hair loss, and that's just one example.)

If YOU had hair suddenly falling out, wouln't you see your PCP or dermatologist?     Many things cause hair loss (medications, hormones, heredity), and I would think any woman with half a brain would get going to find the actual cause.

Personally I'm guessing a lot of these claims are FRAUDULENT .... people wanting to get on the "I want some money" bandwagon.     

IMO, if you cannot prove nothing else is a possibility, you should be excluded from the class action suit.

[HappyDaze]

---

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:

Okay .......  I just read the article and nowhere does it say that any of the claimants provided ANY medical documentation that it was, in fact, the Wen CC that caused the problem!    (Thyroid deficiencies are a common reason for hair loss, and that's just one example.)

If YOU had hair suddenly falling out, wouln't you see your PCP or dermatologist?     Many things cause hair loss (medications, hormones, heredity), and I would think any woman with half a brain would get going to find the actual cause.

Personally I'm guessing a lot of these claims are FRAUDULENT .... people wanting to get on the "I want some money" bandwagon.     

IMO, if you cannot prove nothing else is a possibility, you should be excluded from the class action suit.

---

I got an email asking me if I want to get compensated and if I read it correctly, I could opt for a $25 compensation, no questions asked, or if I wanted a bigger piece of the pie I could chose the Tier 2 payout option. Here is the claim form for the Tier 2. It asks alot of specific medical information and it appears you have to show documentation of damage but it looks like it could simply be pictures which, as we all know, doesn't prove causation. I have no idea if they can reject your Tier 2 claim if you don't have adequate proof or not. I suppose they could.

https://www.wenclasssettlement.com/content/documents/Tier2ClaimForm.pdf