Hey, there! Log in / Register

Newton company sues competitor for not sucking enough

Euro-Pro, a Newton-based company that makes vacuum cleaners, is suing Dyson, Inc. over its claims that its vacuums have "twice the suction" of other vacuums.

Euro-Pro says they don't. In a lawsuit filed in US District Court in Boston yesterday, Euro-Pro explains its dust-up with Dyson:

Euro-Pro has commissioned third-party independent laboratory testing, conducted pursuant to the referenced ASTM F558 standard, which proves that the Shark Powered Lift-Away has suction that is greater than or approximately equal to that of the advertised Dyson Animal vacuums, and in all events, well within the margin necessary to render Dyson’s “Twice the Suction” claim literally false.

Euro-Pro says it wants Dyson to clean up its act and pay it triple damages for all the money it claims it's lost to consumers who don't actually test the veracity of the claim, plus lawyers' fees.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Free tagging: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon Euro-Pro's complaint474.49 KB


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Can't beat their competition so they resort to using the courts to bully them out of business.

Why aren't they suing Consumer Reports and the other publications which test and review appliances?

up
Voting closed 0

Did consumer reports say that Dyson Animal vacuum has 2x the suction of Shark vacuum? Consumer reports is not a government regulatory agency, so I don't know why you think they should be sued if the company believes it is Dyson that is lying.

up
Voting closed 0

Can't beat their competition so they resort to using inflated marketing claims to steal customers and drive out of business.

Why aren't they being honest about the performance of their products relative to their competitors?

up
Voting closed 0

Nothing to do with following truth-in-advertising laws.

up
Voting closed 0

But there is NO justification whatsoever for the requested "triple damages" lottery payout.

up
Voting closed 0

... I think that's for the court to decide, not random dudes on the internet.

up
Voting closed 0

Triple damages is to make it bad business to lie or otherwise break the law. If a criminal robbed a store and all they had to do was return the items if they got caught, there would be little incentive for criminals not to steal: at worst, they have to give what they took back. That is why Dyson, if found guilty, shouldn't just have to pay the business they took from Shark for lying, but also another amount to make it unprofitable to try to do again.

up
Voting closed 0

Well, that sucks...

up
Voting closed 0

I love my Shark. Works great, lots of attachments, and about 1/3 the cost of the Dyson.

up
Voting closed 0

Maybe their products suck less now (or more?) but when I had a shark, it couldn't pick up anything other than dirt + dust. Shredded bit of paper? Yeah... we'll be staying on the floor.

up
Voting closed 0

how much suction does one need?

up
Voting closed 0

My vacuum cleaner failed to suck, which sucked. So I fixed it, and now it sucks, which fails to suck.

up
Voting closed 0