Purity Products Lawsuit Update: FTC Action, Recall, and Prop 65

The Purity Products lawsuit activity that most consumers are asking about is a consolidated proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, where individual billing complaints against the Plainview-based supplement seller have been combined into a single case. As of 2026, the parties are in mediation, and a preliminary settlement framework is expected by mid-year. Reporting on the litigation puts the estimated settlement fund between $5 million and $15 million, covering purchases made from 2018 through 2025.¹

What the Lawsuits Allege

The claims center on “negative option billing.” Plaintiffs say Purity Products enrolled them in its SuperSaver auto-shipment program without clear, affirmative consent, sometimes through pre-checked boxes on order forms or through phone representatives who did not adequately disclose the recurring nature of the charge. Some customers say they thought they were buying a single product or accepting a free trial.¹

Individual suits feeding into the current proceeding include Smith v. Purity Products Inc. (2021, unauthorized autoship charges), Davis v. Purity Products Inc. (2022, false health claims), and Johnson v. Purity Products Inc. (2023, deceptive subscription enrollment). The complaints allege violations of state automatic renewal statutes, including California’s Automatic Renewal Law, and of federal standards enforced by the FTC.¹

Beyond enrollment, the complaints describe a pattern around getting out of the program:

Customers say the SuperSaver program can be signed up for online but not cancelled online, and that email cancellation requests are refused, forcing a phone call.²
On those calls, consumers report extended retention efforts, including recitations of product benefits and alternative offers.²
Some report being charged after cancelling, and needing multiple calls to secure refunds. The 60-day money-back guarantee has reportedly required customers to return unopened product at their own expense.²
Charges have reportedly appeared under alternate merchant names on credit card statements, making the source of the billing harder to identify.¹

Purity Products has told the Better Business Bureau that its SuperSaver program can be managed online, by email, or by phone, and that the retention-related portion of cancellation calls is a standard procedure to ensure cancellations are “accurately completed.”²

Who May Be Covered

The consolidated proceeding contemplates a class of consumers who bought from Purity Products between 2018 and 2025, particularly those enrolled in the SuperSaver auto-ship program. Terms, eligibility, and any claims process would be defined in the settlement framework itself, which had not been finalized as of the mediation stage.¹

The FTC Action

In 2024, the Federal Trade Commission opened an administrative action against Purity Products for deceptive trade practices, running parallel to the private billing suits.¹

Separate Matters Not Part of the Billing Case

Two other Purity Products legal actions sometimes get grouped with the billing litigation but are distinct and generally do not create claims for auto-ship customers.

The MyBladder Recall

Purity Products voluntarily recalled its MyBladder dietary supplement in October 2025 over possible Escherichia coli contamination. The FDA published the recall on October 28, 2025, identifying lot number 030425176; the company attributed the issue to a temporary change in suppliers. The product had been sold directly and through Walmart and Amazon. The FDA has since classified the recall as completed and terminated.³

The 2017 California Proposition 65 Settlement

A company operating as “Water Pure, Inc. dba Purity Products” resolved a California Proposition 65 case in 2017, Environmental Research Center, Inc. v. Water Pure Inc. (Case No. RG17852042, Alameda County Superior Court), over alleged lead and cadmium exposure from certain supplements without required warnings. The June 13, 2017 consent judgment set daily exposure limits (0.5 micrograms of lead; 4.1 micrograms of cadmium) for covered products sold in California absent Prop 65 warnings, with $50,000 in total financial terms. That case is closed and unrelated to the current billing litigation.⁴

1
LawFold. Purity Products Lawsuit
2
Better Business Bureau. Purity Products Complaints
3
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Purity Products Announces Recall of Dietary Supplement My Bladder Because of Possible Health Risk
4
California Office of the Attorney General. 60-Day Notice – 2016-01558