Bauer ReAkt Lawsuit

[RickDC 24]

News Article

http://www.thestar.com/business/2014/11/13/competition_bureau_checks_helmetmaker_bauer_over_concussion_claims.html

Actual Agreement

http://www.ct-tc.gc.ca/CMFiles/CT-2014-006_Registered%20Consent%20Agreement_2_38_11-13-2014_4472.pdf

Hockey equipment manufacturer Bauer has agreed to stop making claims about its RE-AKT helmets that the Competition Bureau says create the impression that the helmets can protect players from concussions, in a consent agreement filed with the Competition Tribunal. The Competition Bureau alleged that Bauer did not conduct adequate and proper testing to support such performance claims. Bauer also agreed to donate $500,000 worth of equipment to a charity, implement corporate compliance programs, and pay $40,000 toward the Bureau’s investigation costs.

I emailed them in 30 Nov 2014 and 3 Jan 2015 enquiring about their claims and that I had purchased 2 helmets based upon their claims of being the top helmet to protect against concussions (I only have 1 head, and willing to spend extra to protect it to the max!). Received an automatic response saying they'd get back to me within 5 working days. I haven't received any response. Just a heads up (sorry for the pun) if you're thinking of buying a ReAkt helmet..

[IPv6Freely 2100]

Still wouldn't keep me from buying one, most comfortable helmet I've ever worn.

Pretty sure this has been discussed elsewhere too, but way too lazy to look for the thread.

[RickDC 24]

Still wouldn't keep me from buying one, most comfortable helmet I've ever worn.

Pretty sure this has been discussed elsewhere too, but way too lazy to look for the thread.

I completely agree - the ReAkt is the only helmet, for my head, that feels completely comfortable.. tried every other brand and there were pressure points or just didn't feel right - the CCM Resistance, for example, had an uncomfortable point right on top of the crown of my head.

I love the helmet, just annoyed and feel that no manufacturer should make up or over-exaggerate claims. If they do, then they should be financially punished and any customers that purchased based upon those claims be recompensed in some way.

[mojo122 541]

I love the helmet, just annoyed and feel that no manufacturer should make up or over-exaggerate claims. If they do, then they should be financially punished and any customers that purchased based upon those claims be recompensed in some way.

What compensation are you looking for?

[chippa13 1844]

In the American way where everyone wants something for nothing. If you weren't hurt due to the exaggerated claims then you shouldn't get squat. Not to mention, everybody should know by now that helmets can't prevent concussions.

[mojo122 541]

Buzzkill....

[RickDC 24]

Chippa. I'm not American - I'm actually English living in Canada - what I believe is correct is that companies should be able to make exaggerated claims for a product, make several millions in revenue off the back of that and then pay a punitive fine. How is that going to dissuade other companies doing the same or it reoccurring in the future? Chippa - so you're condoning that companies can make whatever claims they like and they don't have to have any accountability?

The mere fact that Bauer hasn't responded, makes me wonder if I have an issue with another one of their items then they won't address it; that, I have a problem with. As a business owner myself, I stand behind my products, and realise that great customer service is intangible, but by far the best, and cheapest, marketing tool.

I'm annoyed that Bauer hasn't done more to address this - and even more disappointed that Bauer hasn't bothered to respond to my 2 emails despite their receipt acknowledgment.

[EJB 488]

To each their own. While I do think some buckets probably protect better than others & assume technology can prove this through testing. No bucket is concussion proof, not sure where the lawsuit will go.

Admittedly I did not read over the links. As far as I know, Bauer never said the Re-AKT would prevent you from having a concussion while wearing it. So wouldn't there have to be substantial evidence that the concussion happened related to the helmet being less protective than something else that could have been worn. Also Bauer has their research they based their marketing on.

Long story short, happy with the bucket the Little Man is wearing & have no illusions that it prevents concussions. Go Utes!

So in a nutshell, cliff note it for me.... Is the lawsuit saying you are more likely to have a concussion with a Re-AKT? What's the gist of this hub bub...?

[IPv6Freely 2100]

I like to think its better than nothing.

I also have no problem with them presenting scientific research they've done and say "this may help prevent concussions", assuming their data backs up the claim. But there is also a big difference between "may help prevent" and "will prevent". I guess it depends on their wording.

In the case of the re-akt, if I recall correctly the suspend-tech liner was designed to help with some of the rotational impacts that their research said can contribute towards concussions. If their data shows evidence of reduced strain from that particular type of impact compared to other helmets, I have no issue with it. Again it REALLY depends how its worded.

[Axxion89 32]

Buyer beware, it goes for everything. The best helmet out there is the one that fits you best. Most helmets are almost identical in materials used so to me its all about fit

[Stryker 37]

From what I read, the claim had to do with the rotational management properties of the helmet. Not concussions per se, but the way the suspend-tech liner protected against these spinning impacts. Essentially, Bauer claimed (with their own funded experiments) that it protected better than other helmets on the market. However, when examined by the competition bureau, these studies were shown to not be conclusive enough to be able to be used as functional advertisement by Bauer. What i got from Bauer stated it didn't necessarily mean they weren't better at managing rotational impacts, but that the data they used in itself was not enough for them to be able to market and advertise their helmet as being the best, or the only helmet with rotational management properties.

From the news article, "Either way, the bureau has told Bauer to alter the marketing message around its RE-AKT helmets, making sure not to imply they offer heightened protection against rotational force. "

This is why we are now instructed to not mention rotational properties when selling or describing a Reakt or Reakt 100 to our customers.

TL;DR: Bauer did not have enough independent research to back up their rotational management properties to the point they were advertising.

EDIT: I ended up reading the specific Canadian Competition act segment that was referenced in the report (bolded for emphasis):

74.01 (1) A person engages in reviewable conduct who, for the purpose of promoting, directly or indirectly, the supply or use of a product or for the purpose of promoting, directly or indirectly, any business interest, by any means whatever,

(b) makes a representation to the public in the form of a statement, warranty or guarantee of the performance, efficacy or length of life of a product that is not based on an adequate and proper test thereof, the proof of which lies on the person making the representation;

Now, on the topic of compensation, (in Canada) if you can prove in any way that this wrong has negatively affected you in a reasonable way, there could be some type of litigation that could arise. The major issue is the cause of action, or why a court would hear this case in the first place. If you feel lied to, that probably isn't enough to warrant a trial. However, if you can prove that this act caused some form of physical, emotional, or financial damages then you could have a chance in private court, I suppose. To be honest, I don't see a situation where a trial would even be heard as there is no real cause of action that has occurred.

At any rate, Bauer gets a slap on the wrist, until some independent test can confirm (or deny) that the Reakt helmet is better at managing rotations then others on the market.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer, and these are simply my thoughts, speculations, and inferences based on what I have seen and read

[mojo122 541]

After looking at everything in depth I don't consider it to be a case where Bauer intentionally misled the consumer. Does their marketing department occasionally get overzealous....maybe?

[Stewie 721]

Yeah. I don't always like these types of lawsuits and those that pursuit them. It deters manufacturers from making improvements and doing research towards the overall goal. As mojo says, maybe their ads are a little over zealous, but your not going to pour money into R and D without in the end wanting to make some sort of claim (as long as your research shows there is some sort of benefit). So long as it doesn't increase your risk of concussion, and their aren't tons of people with concussions because they used the Re-akt, I don't think they should have to really pay anything. There probably isn't any real convincing evidence that they don't increase your protection from concussions either .As far as saying you over paid for them, well that's the price of top of the line helmets in 2015.

[Chadd 916]

It's my understanding that VN based foams do provide better impact dissipation than EPP foams in regards to rotational impacts. So, that particular point is at least accurate.

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

If Bauer had used an independent lab for the research then I would have to agree with all above. But using their own as mentioned above to "Verify" the claims then hey its we say its better so it is. Sorry that doesnt fly. It should have been backed up by others to solidify the claim.

I too bought one for this reason with my large number of concussions only to get another with it on while just losing balance and getting whiplash. I haven't played since and that was 3 years ago now. I didn't really like the fit of the helmet but it was meh and with the "extra Protection" and my discount at the time I felt it was the right helmet.

Knowing this now I would like my money back. It was only worn about 10 times. I dont think that is too much to ask? I do agree suing for large claims when in my boat is a joke. give a refund if they are not happy and feel they were cheated but nothing more. I am not saying I feel cheated per say but I would still like my money back. Anyone want a small black ReAkt? Cheap.....LOL

[EJB 488]

I didn't really like the fit of the helmet but it was meh and with the "extra Protection" and my discount at the time I felt it was the right helmet.

Didn't like the fit? Poor fit? Don't understand that at all....?

Excuse me if I find it amusing that you want a refund on a helmet that you bought, knowing it didn't fit, now thinking you have a chance of getting a concussion.

[Stewie 721]

Bauer themselves have said that fit is the number one factor in a helmets protection. Asking a helmet that doesn't for properly to protect your done is your fault not theirs. These technologies are developed to work when a proper fit is achieved. Also like they said, they don't market these as concussion proof. It can help to prevent, that's their claim. Once you get concussions, you are at a further risk for ones in the future.

Don't buy protective gear that doesn't fit no matter what claims are attached.

Also, if you only lost balance and got a concussion from whiplash, what helmet would protect from that?

[mojo122 541]

Also, if you only lost balance and got a concussion from whiplash, what helmet would protect from that?

I'd argue the helmet worked as it sounds like he didn't split his head wide open. We've been down the "concussion prevention road" many times. Looking at the head and anatomy, physiology, and physics, I just don't see anything being manufactured that can prevent a concussion.

[DarkStar50 680]

If you are really serious about not getting a concussion from hockey, the solution is simple: don't play hockey.

[leftwinger37 43]

A Bauer guy is going to be a Bauer guy regardless of false claims/negative attention. Same for most other brands.

[DarkStar50 680]

"I emailed them on 30 January 2015."

1. How is that possible?

2. Now we know why they didn't respond.

[JaniV 9]

He is in waaaaaaaayyyy different timezone.. :D

[RickDC 24]

We're way advanced in Canada... 30th Jan should have been 3rd ;-)

"I emailed them on 30 January 2015."

1. How is that possible?

2. Now we know why they didn't respond.

Still no response from Bauer though..

My issue is not buying a helmet that is "concussion proof". My issue is that if I purchase something based upon specific claims (that it is the best helmet to reduce this risk of concussion); and those claims turn out to be false, then I have a problem with that. If you bought a red jersey online and it came through as blue, would you return it? or would you just suck it up because it's still a jersey?

I don't agree with class action lawsuits where the only winners are the lawyers and the rest of us get $10 in vouchers; nor is the solution suing for $1billion.

I'm more concerned that i have raised a legitimate issue with Bauer, and they've not bothered to respond, as a "Bauer" guy, that troubles me if I have issues with anything I buy from them - it appears as though they don't support the customer after a purchase.

[Stewie 721]

We're way advanced in Canada... 30th Jan should have been 3rd ;-)

Still no response from Bauer though..

My issue is not buying a helmet that is "concussion proof". My issue is that if I purchase something based upon specific claims (that it is the best helmet to reduce this risk of concussion); and those claims turn out to be false, then I have a problem with that. If you bought a red jersey online and it came through as blue, would you return it? or would you just suck it up because it's still a jersey?

I don't agree with class action lawsuits where the only winners are the lawyers and the rest of us get $10 in vouchers; nor is the solution suing for $1billion.

I'm more concerned that i have raised a legitimate issue with Bauer, and they've not bothered to respond, as a "Bauer" guy, that troubles me if I have issues with anything I buy from them - it appears as though they don't support the customer after a purchase.

has using this helmet caused you to have a concussion? from what I understand, the suit isn't saying the claims are false, just that there isn't in their opinion substantial evidence for them to be able to use the terminology in marketing.

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

Didn't like the fit? Poor fit? Don't understand that at all....?
Excuse me if I find it amusing that you want a refund on a helmet that you bought, knowing it didn't fit, now thinking you have a chance of getting a concussion.

I did not like the fit after using it for a couple of skates I did like it at the store and seeing as I only had a couple skates in it, YES I would like a refund. Same as if I hadn't fallen.

I'd argue the helmet worked as it sounds like he didn't split his head wide open. We've been down the "concussion prevention road" many times. Looking at the head and anatomy, physiology, and physics, I just don't see anything being manufactured that can prevent a concussion.

Yes I agree and I am not blaming the helmet for the concussion. I really have to write during the day and not late at night.

Once you get concussions, you are at a further risk for ones in the future.

Don't buy protective gear that doesn't fit no matter what claims are attached.
Also, if you only lost balance and got a concussion from whiplash, what helmet would protect from that?

Being in the Toronto Western Hospital concussion study and on the Board at the CSA and Stopconcussions I am aware that a helmet will do nothing for a concussion. However I was intrigued about the rotational impact claims and did take there information to be more fact than say so. But again I am not wanting a refund due to the claims but more for the ill fit I found after wearing for a few skates. as mentioned above it felt great at the store.

I think I have answered the above questions?