Report Fraud About Us What We Do

All About the Hawaiian Host Class Action Lawsuit Consider The Consumer

Class Actions

All About the Hawaiian Host Class Action Lawsuit

It’s not from Hawaii! Things you need to know about the Hawaiin Host Candies fiasco

If you have been to your local grocery store as of late? What is your favorite aisle in there? Is it the chips aisle? Or is it the liquor aisle? Well, if you’re a fan of sweets, you will definitely fall in love with any given store’s chocolate and sweets offerings any time of the year. 

However, there are specialized stores that are only located in certain parts of the country. It is mostly done to cater to a specific target demographic with a specific product or service offering. Well, one might instantly consider, without hesitation, that the product that one buys from these stores comes from the local area. That case may be untrue and that is what the accusations the makers of Hawaiian Host Candies are facing in a lawsuit. 

Want to know more about it? We here at Consider The Consumer have prepared a breakdown of it for you. Continue reading to learn more. 

  • 1.) Two people filed the lawsuit. 

The plaintiffs of the lawsuit are Andrea Ward, from Colorado, and Alison Toy, from California. Both of them have purchased Hawaiian Host Milk Chocolate Alohamacs and Hawaiian Host Maui Caramacs in different retail outlets in their area ranging from Costco to ABC store. 

The aforementioned products are sold in ABC stores in the State of Hawaii and are also available in different third party retailers. 

They are suing for the alleged misdeeds of the chocolate company behind the products and they seek to represent several classes of consumers in their lawsuit. 

  • 2.) Ward and Toy accuse Hawaiian Host Candies of LA Inc. of “misleading, false, unfair, and deceptive practices.” 

The two say that they were enticed in buying the products for they believed that they actually came from the State of Hawaii. They claim, as reported in a feature by Katherine Webster on Top Class Actions, that the company has misled them through their product packaging tactics.

 There are many elements and imagery present that are usually attributed to Hawaiian culture such as the hibiscus flowers, references to the beach, and well-known landmarks that are found in the Aloha State. 

There is even a label on the packaging that states “HAWAIIAN HOST, INC. Honolulu Hawaii 96817”. 

The companies’ digital marketing strategy and social media accounts also use different visual elements that are influenced by Hawaiian culture. The aforementioned factors lead to the impression that indeed they originate from the Hawaiian islands in the Pacific. 

Contrary to these representations, the company that makes the products is actually based in California. 

  • 3.) The chocolates are actually manufactured outside the Aloha State, allegedly. 

With the company basing its operations in the State of California, Ward and Toy both claim that Hawaiian Host Candies of LA Inc., the maker of the Hawaiian Host Chocolate candy products, also operates a factory in the state. 

As Webster continued to reference the case’s official filing, the company allegedly owns and operates a large chocolate factory in Gardena, California. 

The company’s “principal place of business” is at South Avalon Boulevard in Gardena. Gardena is a city located in the South Bay region of Los Angeles County. 

  • 4.) Plaintiffs accuse the company has violated a series of legislations. 

Ward and Toy declare in their lawsuit that the company that makes the chocolates has defied the many different laws in the states of California, Colorado, and Nevada. They have also accused the company of intentional and negligent misrepresentation, common law restitution, and unjust enrichment. 

Both are also asking to be granted an injunction, in the form of injunctive relief in particular, which they believe would halt the company’s involvement in illegal deeds. They are also seeking a monetary award of restitution and other forms of costs the court may deem proper. 

  • 5.) The plaintiffs are still open to patronizing the product. 

Though they have filed a case against the maker of the product, Ward and Toy share that they would still like to buy themselves the aforementioned products. They add that the reason behind this is that they are regular customers of the stores where they are offered and thus still open to continue supporting the product in the future. 

Editor’s note on the Hawaiian Host Class Action Lawsuit:

This feature is created to keep you in the know and inform you of the breakdown of facts of the case filed against the maker of Hawaiian Host chocolate treats.  If you have any questions or queries regarding this piece of news and its updates, do please send us a message by clicking the ‘Contact Us’ button below! We’d love to hear back from you. 

Contact Us

For further information, don’t hesitate to contact us via email at Outreach@ConsiderTheConsumer.com, find us on Twitter or Facebook, or even connect with us directly on our website! We look forward to hearing from you all.

Similarly, please check out our current list of Class Actions and Class Action Investigations, here.

Interested in articles like these? Become a subscriber below!

Interested in posts like these? Stay up to date with our newsletter!

No thoughts on “All About the Hawaiian Host Class Action Lawsuit” yet. Be the first to speak your mind!

Leave a Reply