Does anyone have a link to the "never clogs, never loses suction" lawsuit? I searched Google, but couldn't find the info I was looking for. TIA!

Here's what's written on the matter on the Forum from another thread.
 
The post of inquiry:
 
Quote from old-timer on 07/12/07 at 9:31am:

 
The posts in reply to the above:
 
Quote from Carmine_Difazio on 07/12/07 at 12:28pm:

 
 
And likewise a follow up post to clarify the matter further:
 
Quote from Carmine_Difazio on 07/12/07 at 10:45pm:

 
Note too that major USA only retailers selling dysons like KOHL's and LOWE's have 'scrubbed' the 5 year old dyson claims completely from their dyson ads.  You no longer see;  "NEVER CLOGS and NEVER LOSES SUCTION" with dyson vacuums.  Other USA retailers, with and without worldwide presence, will soon follow and have to drop the claims just as dyson did with its USA Web Site.  Why?  To avoid liability for a lawsuit(s) if they continue to make the claims, knowing that an authoritative body, albeit in the UK, established and sanctioned to rule on these matters, has declared the dyson claims "false" and "misleading" and unusable.
 
Will a class action lawsuit against dyson follow?  Ask yourself this question:  Are there bases for a lawsuit?  
 
IMHO, the answer is most definitely.  Why?  A dyson consumer(s) needs to show 2 things to prevail:  
 
(1) He/she (they) bought the dyson vacuum(s) by relying on the "false" claims and were willing to pay the higher prices for the dyson vacuums because the dyson claims made the product unique from all others on the market.  
 
(2) Dyson's intent with the "false" claims was to "mislead" and "deceive" buyers in order to sell its vacuums.  This is harder to prove but not impossible.  Why?  Buyers need to show that dyson was aware of the fact that its vacuum filters clog and lose suction.  We know dyson knows these facts and knew these facts when the claims were made.  Why? Because the dyson User's Manual tells users that the filters have to be cleaned.  And there are industry experts (like Jimmy the Pro above) who know this and said so publicly including on this Forum for many years.  Do dyson employees read this Forum?  We know the answer is "yes" because there is at least one poster here (and more likely more who don't say) who says he is a dyson employee: Matt mmc who has been conspicuously absent from any discussion of these matters.  He is a dyson account rep, or at least was.  If dyson employees are aware of the untrue claims, then dyson is aware.
 
Let's summarize:  We have a "hidden disclosure" (in the dyson User Manual) of a material "false" claim made for one purpose: To sell dyson vacuums by making them unique.  How?  By knowingly using product claims declared to be "false" and "misleading."  
 
You be the judge and jury of the facts and circumstances.  Especially if you bought the $400 plus dyson product over the $100 vacuum product because you relied on the false claims.  As one dyson Forum fawner here use to say:  Sounds like an imminent lawsuit all tied up in a big red bow just waiting to be served.  Except this time its against dyson.
 
Carmine D.  
 
 
 

My good friend JimB:
 
First, I'm Catholic not Muslim.  
 
Second:  If you read my posts I write:
 
"NEVER CLOGS, NEVER LOSES SUCTION."  
 
The poster got it right:
 
Quote from doubletwins on 07/16/07 at 12:14pm:

 
And so did Jimmy the Pro:
 
Quote from old-timer on 07/12/07 at 9:31am:

 
Did you forget already: "NEVER CLOGS, NEVER LOSES SUCTION":  The now infamous dyson mantra for the last 5 years but no more thanks to the ASA and HOOVER Candy, Oreck and 36 dyson litigants.  I mean complainants.  Not on the dyson USA Web site anymore.  Some alphabet soup and numbers test.  What that heck is that all about?  Dyson consumers never saw these test citations before when they bought their dyson vacuums relying on false and misleading claims: NEVER CLOGS, NEVER LOSES SUCTION.  Or was this another hidden disclosure by dyson?  
 
Boo, hiss.  Why?  The tests are not performed and conducted by a vacuum industry sanctioned test entity using approved vacuum industry test standards.  Like the ASTM.  It's a dyson self-serving lab and test to give the appearance of proof for dyson's false product claims.  
 
Why?  Dyson is already gearing up for its (albeit weak) defense of the false and misleading dyson product claims if and when the lawsuit is served.    
 
I hope for your sake and dyson that it has the same reproducible results from the dyson lab tests.  If not...dum dum dum dum.  Get the dyson grave diggers ready.  It's going to be a short funeral.  
 
Carmine D.  

Hey JimB:
 
Who else beside dyson in the vacuum industry uses the IEC lab and testing standards?
 
Carmine D.

Quote from vacuuman on 07/17/07 at 2:44am:

 
Hello vacuuman:
 
Which? magazine, the EU equivalent of the USA Consumer Reports, reports that a large portion of the consumer complaints received about dysons' malfunctions and repairs over the last 8 years deal with clogged filters and loss of suction.  
 
I suspect the reason in part that the 36 complainants banded together and pursued the action with the ASA against dyson for its product claims.  And received a favorable ruling from the ASA at the expense of dyson.  
 
The complainants knew they would prevail successfully in their action against dyson.  And no doubt their action and the ASA ruling forebode a class action lawsuit against dyson for the product claims.  IMHO dyson made a fatal mistake with its product claims.  Why?  We've seen it over and over again.  Dyson as a company and its management consistently exhibit a huge lack of experience, knowledge, and history of the vacuum industry.  That coupled with a very mediocre vacuum product and extremely high prices are all the necessary ingredients for disaster.  
 
Dyson built a brand name in the USA over the last 5 years on false and misleading product claims:  NEVER CLOGS, NEVER LOSES SUCTION.  After the ASA ruling against dyson and the product claims, its trying cleverly [desperately] to reinvent itself.  How?  Technical and scientific jargon.  Sure the dyson fans and fawners come to its defense.  Witness the posts above.  How?  Attacking the messengers: ASA, the ruling, the complainants and their supporters.  USA consumers, especially vacuum buyers, are too smart for the trickery.
 
Dyson fits my analogy of the food coloring in the water:  Put a drop of red food coloring into a glass filled with crystal clear water.  Once the food coloring mixes in, you can't undue it.  Similarly, once you've tarnished your brand name, you can't restore it.
 
Carmine D.