Kristals Cosmetics Lawsuit: Allegations, Defense, and Outcome

The Kristals Cosmetics lawsuits were a cluster of five consumer fraud cases filed in Pitkin County, Colorado, in 2018 against Aspen Retail Management LLC, the operator of two Aspen storefronts tied to the Kristals brand. Customers alleged aggressive sidewalk solicitation, deceptive pricing, and, in one case, suspected drugging with champagne before a $21,860 purchase. Three of the suits settled on undisclosed terms. The two highest-profile cases, along with counter-suits the stores filed against the plaintiffs, were all dismissed by mutual agreement on July 31, 2019, after court-ordered mediation.¹

Who Was Sued

Kristals Cosmetics is a luxury skincare brand launched in 2015 by UHI Cosmetics, a Miami Beach-based private label manufacturer whose president and CEO is Shay Segev. UHI also runs the Deep Sea Cosmetics and Adore Cosmetics brands.²

The Aspen stores were operated by Aspen Retail Management LLC under two names: Aspen Beauty Boutique on Cooper Avenue, formerly known as Aspen Kristals Cosmetics, and Lux Skin Spa on the Hyman Avenue pedestrian mall.³ Complaints to the Aspen Police Department about aggressive sidewalk solicitation and high-pressure sales dated to March 2017. City Clerk Linda Manning said, “I don’t think the city can or will do anything,” and the police declined to pursue criminal charges, calling the matters “more suited for the civil arena.”⁴

What Customers Alleged

Five civil lawsuits were filed against Aspen Retail Management in 2018. The first came from Macey Morris, a Snowmass Village resident who said she made a $3,000 “impulse buy” of skin cream in December 2017 after salespeople drew her in from the sidewalk with free samples. Morris described staff as people who “stand out in the doorway and they lure you in like vipers” and said they were “trained like terrorists to come in and dupe you.”⁵ Three of the earliest suits were resolved on undisclosed terms.³

The Reeves Case

Dean and Kim Reeves, a couple from Durango, Colorado, filed suit on December 19, 2018. They alleged that during a July 13, 2018 visit to Aspen Beauty Boutique, an employee named “Julian” served them champagne even though the store lacked a liquor license. After drinking it, the couple said they felt “very confused and out of sorts” and were “not acting like themselves,” leading them to suspect the drinks had been spiked.⁶

The complaint said the Reeveses were told the purchase would run about $700. Instead, they were charged a total of $21,860 across two credit cards: $2,372.50 on a personal card and $19,127.50 on a business card. An employee allegedly destroyed the receipt for the smaller charge to hide the true total. The suit also claimed staff “strong-armed” the couple and “verbally forced” them to hand over shipping information as they tried to leave.⁷

The Berastequi Case

Cheron Berastequi of Las Cruces, New Mexico, filed around the same time. She alleged that during a September 18, 2018 visit to Lux Skin Spa, staff used photoshopped images of women to sell light therapy equipment. She said she was charged $21,000 for machines and another $5,250 for face masks she did not intend to buy. Berastequi had offered a credit card she believed would be declined, but the charges went through.³

Both suits alleged violations of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, fraud, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiffs’ attorney Chris Bryan of Garfield & Hecht PC said, “The Consumer Protection Act is at play, and you don’t see that very often. That statute is well-suited for these facts.”³

How the Stores Fought Back

On June 25, 2019, Aspen Retail Management filed its own suits against the Reeveses and Berastequi. The company accused the customers of waging “an aggressive media smear campaign” and called the original complaints “rife with untruths, wild accusations, and flat-out perjurious statements.” Aspen Retail said it had audio and video from the Reeveses’ one-hour-and-16-minute visit that would disprove the allegations, and that negative publicity had cost the stores roughly $1.5 million in lost business.⁸

Bryan moved to dismiss the counter-suit on July 3, 2019, arguing it was intended to “intimidate the Reeveses from attempting to vindicate their rights as consumers” and to sidestep a default judgment the couple had already been awarded in their original case.⁸

How the Cases Ended

Court-ordered mediation took place on July 29, 2019. Two days later, Judge Anne Norrdin dismissed all four remaining lawsuits, both the customer suits and the company’s counter-suits, by mutual agreement. Each side agreed to pay its own attorney fees and costs, and no monetary settlement was publicly disclosed.¹

As part of the resolution, the Reeveses filed a court statement withdrawing their “egregious and salacious allegations,” saying they were “based on our misunderstanding and mistaken perceptions” and expressing regret for “any harm that we may have caused.”¹

Related Cases Against the Parent Company

UHI’s corporate entity, Universal Handicraft Inc., has faced separate consumer litigation over a different brand in its portfolio. In September 2016, a class action, Mollicone et al v. Universal Handicraft, Inc., was filed against the company and CEO Shay Sabag Segev personally. It alleged that the Adore product line was marketed with false claims about a “Plant Stem Cell Formula,” when the products did not actually contain live plant stem cells or deliver the advertised anti-aging benefits.⁹

A federal judge granted final approval of a settlement in August 2018, valued at roughly $700,000. Class members with proof of purchase could claim a $25 cash refund or a gift card worth 50 percent of the purchase price up to $200; those without receipts could receive a $50 gift card. Universal Handicraft also agreed to stop using words such as “proven” and “breakthrough” in its marketing and to stop claiming its formula contained “live” plant cells.⁹¹⁰

A separate class action, Land v. Universal Handicraft, Case No. 1:17-cv-21947, was filed in May 2017 in the Southern District of Florida, raising similar false advertising and fraud claims. That complaint alleged Segev “personally participated in, directed, and controlled the sales, distribution, manufacturing, and advertising” of the Adore line.¹¹ These cases involved the Adore brand rather than Kristals Cosmetics directly.

Where the Brand Operates Now

Kristals Cosmetics has continued to operate outside of Aspen. The brand opened stores at Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino properties in Hollywood and Tampa, Florida, in late 2019 and announced expansion plans into Mexico, Panama, Singapore, and Spain.¹² It remains listed as a retail tenant at the Seminole Hard Rock Hollywood property.¹³

1
Aspen Times. Customers, Aspen Stores Settle Their Differences; Lawsuits Dismissed
2
ThinkRetail. Kristals Cosmetics Eyes Canada for Expansion
3
Aspen Times. Lawsuits: Aspen Stores Bullied, Possibly Drugged Customers
4
Craig Daily Press. Aspen Retailers Face Legal Retaliation Over Aggressive Sales Tactics
5
Denver Post. Aspen Retailer Kristals Cosmetics Fraud Lawsuits
6
The Journal. Lawsuit: Couple Allegedly Was Drugged, Sold $21,860 in Skin Products
7
Post Independent. Lawsuits: Aspen Stores Bullied, Possibly Drugged Customers
8
Aspen Times. Aspen Store, Shoppers in Back-and-Forth Legal Spat
9
Truth in Advertising. Adore Organic Innovations Anti-Aging Claims
10
Citeline. Adore Settles With Nationwide Class Over Apple Stem Cell Anti-Aging Claims
11
Class Action.org. Land v. Universal Handicraft Complaint
12
Kristals Cosmetics. Kristals Opens Second Hard Rock Location
13
Hard Rock Casino Hollywood. Kristals at The Shoppes at the Guitar Hotel