Has anyone sued Dyson for false advertising?

VacuumLand – Vintage & Modern Vacuum Enthusiasts

Help Support VacuumLand:

We all know that you wouldn't need to change a belt on a vacuum that is tossed to the curb as soon as a filter gets clogged or some other part breaks.

I have to laugh at all the infomercials that brag up how great a product is as shown on tv. Most don't live up to that claim. By the time the gullible figure it out. The product manufacture has met his goal. Fleece anyone that will pay good money for such a "wonder" product. Only to find said product on the tables and shelve at every rummage sale and trift store 6 months to a year later.

I want to try it before I buy it. I find some one that all ready has said product or invite the demostrators in to my home. I can still say no for what ever reason to any sales man.

Buyer be ware. If it sounds to good to be true it probably is to good to be true
 
Oh I got hung up on when they were demonstrating the irobot where they had a shop vac there with a blocked hose & I asked them why don't they show how much suction the shop vac has by putting your hand to the nozzle to show us all how much suction it has because you can hear the shop vac whining in the back, they both looked at each other, they hung up on me & said we can't screen what people say on live tv & apologized for that call getting through...
 
Studebaker DID begin life producing horse drawn wagons back in 1852 and the last car rolled off the assembly line in Canada in March, 1966. In fact, for the last two years they were in business Studebakers got Chevrolet engines. Toyota didn't start using the name Land Cruiser until after the company was long out of business.
 
Toyota started producing Land Cruisers in 1951. Studebaker still had 15 more years to go before folding it's tent.
 
Does anyone really believe advertising claims made for any product? Why go through all the cost and effort of suing over exaggerated ad claims? Apply some personal filters and approach all product claims with a degree of doubt. As my parents drilled into my head from as early as I can remember, believe none of what you hear and half of what you see. Never, ever under any circumstance trust a corporation to be honest. Competition punishes honesty. Just assume everyone selling something is lying to you and do your own due dilligence.
 
The claim "no loss of suction" is used by most bagless vacuum manufacturers today. Since there IS a test protocol for such a claim, the manufacturers only have to pass that one test, once.

Even a Shark, with its single cyclone, makes that claim. Yet, the Shark loads its filters with dust after each use.

I sell bagged vacuums every day at the outlet store. I tell people that bagged vacuums won't lose suction for the same reason bagless won't. There's a step the OWNER must do to make the cleaner not lose suction. Clean the filter or change the bag.

I like Dyson vacuums - to a point. I think the quality of the plastic has sharply decreased. I think the quality of the motors has also decreased as they are now so tiny to fit into a ball. I think Dyson, while not a disposable cleaner, is a middle of the road machine. If the object of vacuuming is to get the rug clean, then a vacuum that offers true carpet agitation would trump the Dyson every time. As much as I don't like Kirby vacuums, they do get the rug clean. The fantastic Maytag M1200 has a great demo commercial where they compare carpet cleaning to a brand new Dyson. The Maytag makes the sand just six inches out of the rug and it's inhales into the Maytag. The Dyson just sits there without deep cleaning - sweeping only the rug surface and making it appear clean.
 
Yes there is a test they have to prove No lot of suction but Dyson go beyond the standard. Dyson plastic hasn't decreased actually is got so much better and the plastic hasn't changed it has always been abs plastic and they made it flexible so it won't break as easily as others and again Dyson motors haven't changed in the last 10 years American still use the old Panasonic motor and in England we have just started using it again. If all bagvacuum cleaners had no loss of suction they would say on the machine or on the box on or on advertising. Test you said Maytag against the Dyson well I noticed people won't do with the Dyson DC 65 Is that now has agitation. The videos on YouTube the Dyson against something using dyson models are discontinued or haven't got good agitation is nun it comparing it to the DC 65.
 
dysonman1

I too only like them to a point. Dysons plastic is flexible because they seem to be using less, with what they call is 'doing more with less'. There is a lot of Polypropylene plastics used on Dysons in addition to ABS & Polycarbonate. Despite all the tests Dyson claim, the real test is in the home so let's see how these machines do in 5 years time.

One thing I did observe is that I used to see a lot of DC03's and DC04s in the shops in the 90s - 2000s with broken parts on shop displays. Things like wand caps, bin catches etc broken. Not seen that on these newer models, but saying that, I never saw a broken DC24 in the shop and my DC24 has broken quite a few times over 4 years.

One thing Dyson does very well is provide excellent customer service. Here in the UK they send out parts without any issues. Their 5 year parts & labour warranty is one of the best I've ever come across.
 
Blakaeg, it's interesting what you say about the Dyson aftercare. Many times I have wondered whether it would not just be better and cheaper all round to make the cleaners more durable rather than to keep sending new part out.

The plastic on the DC01 cleaners was a joke. The soleplate stood no chance at all, not with it being as thin and flexible as it was. Even the plates on 04 and 07 style cleaners have proven to be less hard wearing than those on other cleaners, albeit more durable than the 01 range. A lot of the plastic on Dyson cleaners gets very brittle, especially in sunlight. I've never known a brand of vacuum cleaner have such poor build quality as the Dyson. I think Dyson timed it right to market his cleaner in 1993 though; 10 years earlier and people would probably not paid his price for a cleaner of such low quality.
 
Yeah I'll The old Dyson were pretty brittle. Being owner of the new Dysons the plastic is fantastic Flexes a bit so it doesn't crack or Break under pressure. And some people on here just bought a Dyson DC 41 MKII all say how great the plastic is. And he's DC 24 quite an old model They had had problems Forget this is like a 5 6 7 year-old models you have changed a lot since then how the plastic is a lot better and they've made a little bit more flexible so it doesn't break.
 
Vinyage,

Yes that's true. I'd rather not have to keep getting parts out all the time. But I suppose its good knowing that the backup is there. Never experienced such good service like that before. They even replaced the filters in my machine when it went in for repair. Got a DC35 out of them too ;)

dysonb0y,

You are a little like a broken record and its getting a bit annoying reading all over the forum. I think we get how much you like the DC41 MK2 model. We don't need you to keep going on all the time about Dyson plastics being good cos they bend etc. Actually, I was talking about Dyson sending parts for ALL my machines and that includes the cordless that they still make and the battery issues I've encountered with it.

Thank you.
 
dysonb0y

The plastics on the new Dyson's are not all that better. I work in a repair shop and the amount of newer Dyson's is ridiculous.  The biggest thing to break is the spine that goes from the handle down to the ball. Also, I have sold more Simplicity's over Dyson's, because even the new DC65 does not agitate anywhere near as well as the Simplicity's, even their lower end models. If I can get the time on Thursday as I am off tomorrow, I will make a video showing you that the newest Dyson still does not have the best agitation.
 
Well I know someone in America who works in a vacuum cleaner shop and he said that he do get a few but not many Dyson dc65 repairs but most do to user error but not a silly And most are quite simple.amount.he said the most machine they get in for repair is simplicity and Riccar.
 
Suckolux, most of us here will get much better service out of a given vacuum regardless of quality just because most of us have some empathy for equipment and are diligent enough to change filters, not blow bags out and generally not abuse things. We could probably make the meanest Bissel last twenty years (I couldn't think of worse punishment!). I saw a high end late model canister vacuum in a thrift shop the week before last and the swivel neck of the floor brush was shattered. How does somebody do that? I have forty five year old floor brushes that have never been damaged. It's all the user.
 
Dyson not disposable cleaners--look again!Look in the dumpsters at the vac shop here and at the transfer station dumps where people dump their trash here.Seems like Dysons are now becoming the most expensive dumpster vacuums.It really doesn't have to be this way-if their owners would clean or change the filters and empty their dust cups after EACH use-then they would last longer.Couple weeks ago among the broken and dirty Dysons thrown into the dumpster at the trash station--I found a really beautiful,shiny Hoover Celeberty vacuum with its hose,wands,powernozzle.It just needed a cleaning up.The Dysons its was among would need more than "cleaning up"they were broken or missing parts.
 
And Studebaker started producing Land Cruisers in 1935, before Toyota even started making cars. Point being Studebaker had the Land Cruiser first. Just as Toyota was late to the game producing pickup trucks. The U.S. auto industry was decades ahead.
 
Well the Toyota firm must have done something wrong then to consider merging with GM in 1984 when they opened their U.S car plant! Honda I think were first, but then followed Nissan.

Surely then the U.S industry didn't require Japanese brands if the auto industry was "decades" ahead...
 
While this is drifting from my original point, Dyson quality is, what I'd consider, upper end discount store quality. I won't even say department store because Sears has some better made canister models.

I have a DC07, DC33, DC16 and DC35. The DC07 is better built than the DC33 without a doubt. The DC33 seems unusually frail at the base. It creaks, frankly the motor doesn't sound too hot, now bear in mind I maintain these and own many vacs and alternate them so it isn't like they had extensive use.

I use the DC33 to do intermittent quick cleaning of my breezeway, the DC07 to quick clean upstairs, the DC16 to do the kitchen. I use a Fantom Thunder on my living room and computer room. Other than that I usually use a Rainbow E Series.

My breezeway is mostly bare floors with a couple of low pile commercial carpet squares I got when Blockbuster was closing. The Dyson is fine for this type of work. The DC07 cleans the surface of the carpet upstairs but deep clean it doesn't. Their brush roller is simply not aggressive enough. If I wait a week and run the Rainbow it is an absolute mess.

As far as industry standard tests, I don't care what the standard is, I could easily demonstrate that the claims are nonsense. Especially removing more dirt claims they are making now. That one can easily be disproven and many YouTube videos already show it against higher end machines.

As far as the cyclonic technology, Dyson designed it, but the Fantom Thunder (regardless of version), in my estimation is the most durable and best designed implementation of it.
 

Similar threads

turbo500
James Dyson: "The EU should spur invention, not mediocrity"
5 6 7
Replies
131
Views
132
sptyks
sptyks

Latest posts

Back
Top