Once again, the popular NutriBullet blender has come under fire for exploding without warning.
A case filed June 2 by Simmons Hanly Conroy alleged that Capital Brands, manufacturer of the high-speed blender, failed to warn customers about its dangers. The South Carolina plaintiff suffered first-degree burns to her arms and second-degree burns to her chest and seeks to represent all consumers of the defective blenders for amounts they spent for their purchases. The lawsuit also seeks to prohibit Capital Brands from selling defective blenders. The same defects responsible for Plaintiff’s injuries have been present since 2007, the lawsuit claims – and 11 years later, the same injuries are occurring.
NutriBullet Explosion Lawsuit Highlights an Ongoing Danger
This most recent lawsuit is the only class action case of its kind regarding NutriBullet, the more-powerful cousin of the Magic Bullet. The case tells a familiar story: The blender’s canister can pressurize to the point where it separates from the rest of the product and combusts.
Such explosions endanger anyone in close range; razor-sharp blender components can come flying out of the machine. In addition, even when preparing cold food, the blender’s fast-moving blades can heat its contents to scalding temperatures, which has led in some instances to severe burns.
Furthermore, consumers risk injury even if the blender stays intact throughout use. When the lid is removed, the buildup of pressure may send the blade assembly flying.
The lawsuit alleges that Capital Brands has failed consumers by neglecting to issue a recall or warn that the product might explode. The lawsuit argues this fraudulent concealment violates both federal and state consumer protection laws, as well as warranty laws. The plaintiff seeks damages and “an order preventing Capital Brands from continuing to sell the defective products.” She also “wants the company to warn existing owners about NutriBullet’s potential dangers.”
Capital Brands: ‘Dedicated to Safety’ or Profits?
As it did in an earlier case, Capital Brands will continue to contest all claims.
“NutriBullet is dedicated to the safety and satisfaction of its customers,” Capital Brands said in a statement, suggesting injuries occur from misuse. “NutriBullets are safe and present no issue if used as directed, such as not blending heated foods, or using the blender for longer than necessary to make a smoothie, which is generally less than one minute.”
At this point, the company claims, a safety feature cuts off power to the device.
Consumer complaints tell a different story. Since 2007, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has reviewed multiple reports of these blender defects on its SaferProducts website.
In 2014 Consumer Reports rated the NutriBullet Pro 900 a “safety hazard” after its blades cracked during testing. Still, CPSC deduced “no unreasonable risk of injury to consumers.” Capital Brands, having disputed the warning and made the blades thicker, forced Consumer Reports to lift its warning two years later.
Capital Brands continues to profit from its dangerous device while blaming consumers for their injuries; the device remains available at major retailers and in 14 million homes worldwide; and several consumers are still recovering from their injuries.
If you’re one of them, contact a NutriBullet lawyer to explore possible remedies like reimbursement for purchase of the defective blender.
