Fitbit Sued For Rash-causing Armband

Fitbit Inc., a producer of digital fitness trackers, is involved in a class-action lawsuit with a customer who claims that the company did not adequately warn consumers that the device was defective.

The recall of the Fitbit Force, a digital fitness tracker and watch that looks like a thick rubber wristband, was announced on February 20.

According to a letter to consumers from Fitbit CEO and co-founder James Park, the company began relieving reports from some users that indicated that extended skin contact with the device was causing allergic reactions -- usually in the form of a puffy-red rash -- soon after it was made available for purchase late last year.

After several weeks and an internal investigation on the safety of the product, the company decided to recall the product, as testing had revealed that people sensitive to nickel could develop an allergic contact dermatitis after reacting to the stainless steel components of the device. Park was quick to point out that this was an isolated case of a markedly high number of reactions, and that no other Fitbit product ever warranted a similar allergic reaction.

The company reportedly recalled about 1.3 million devices in the U.S. and Canada.

However, a class-action lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of California accuses Fitbit of not taking enough action to warn consumers of the risk. The lawsuit also accuses the company of misleading consumers in advertising that claimed that the Fitbit Force was safe to wear 24 hours a day -- even in the shower or while asleep.

According to a Reuters report, the plaintiff, Jim Spivey, is claiming that Fitbit should have done more to ensure consumer safety and should compensate victims of the rash-inducing wristbands for negligently misleading them.

Fitbit defended the actions they took regarding the Fitbit Force in a statement, saying that they "took initiative long before this complaint was filed, publicly offered refunds, and worked closely with the [U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission] on its voluntary recall program. "

The lawsuit, seeking class-action status, was filed in the Superior Court of California on March 17.