Are there any lawsuits against Lipo Max for false advertising?
Executive summary
There are extensive consumer complaints and a Better Business Bureau (BBB) alert linking LipoMax to misleading advertising and deep‑fake endorsement videos; BBB Scam Tracker recorded over 170 reports and the company told BBB it did not authorize the AI‑generated videos [1]. I found many individual consumer complaints about unclear billing, difficulty cancelling, refund disputes and aggressive post‑sale coaching pitches, but no court filing or formal lawsuit record appears in the provided sources (available sources do not mention a lawsuit).
1. What the consumer reports say — pattern of deception and billing complaints
Multiple BBB entries and Scam Tracker reports describe a recurring pattern: social‑media videos (sometimes falsely featuring celebrities) funnel buyers into purchases, customers report charges that differ from advertised prices, difficulty cancelling, partial or no refunds, and follow‑up “coaching” upsells — for example, several consumers described being pressured into expensive coaching packages after purchase [2] [3] [4]. JustAnswer’s consumer‑law Q&A summarizes similar flags: unclear billing, cancellation problems and unresponsive customer service [5].
2. The BBB’s public alert — scale and the company’s reply
The BBB issued a scam alert after receiving more than 170 reports about LipoMax in a two‑month period, warning about deep‑fake videos promoting the product and the so‑called “pink salt trick” narrative [1]. In response to the BBB, a LipoMax representative told the organization the AI‑generated or “deep‑fake” videos are not produced by or authorized by the company and that affiliate marketers act independently [1].
3. Independent reporting and watchdog posts — “scam” narratives
Consumer‑protection blogs and watchdog posts describe the LipoMax marketing ecosystem as consistent with known supplement scams: long “infomercial” style landing pages, fabricated testimonials, false health claims (for instance, promises of rapid fat loss), and diversion to product sales in place of a promised “recipe” [6] [7]. Those sites explicitly label the marketing a “scam” and catalog the types of deceptive tactics used [6] [7].
4. Specific consumer allegations in the public record
BBB‑listed complaints include concrete allegations: customers who watched videos claiming Oprah endorsed LipoMax, purchasers who say they were charged more than the advertised price, users who say promised “money‑back guarantees” were not honored, and multiple accounts of aggressive upselling by a named “Lexi” or other coaches [4] [2] [3]. These are first‑person complaints filed with the BBB and summarized by BBB Scam Tracker [3] [4] [2].
5. What’s missing — no litigation records in the supplied sources
The documents and links provided include consumer complaints, BBB alerts and independent blog reporting, but none of the supplied sources cite an active or filed lawsuit against LipoMax for false advertising or related claims. Available sources do not mention any court filings or government enforcement actions specifically against LipoMax in the provided set (available sources do not mention a lawsuit).
6. Regulatory and similar precedents — context from related product warnings
The sources include an FDA public notification about a different product (Lipopastilla + Gold Max) that contained hidden prescription ingredients, illustrating that regulators do act on dangerous or misbranded weight‑loss products — but that FDA notice concerns a different brand, not LipoMax [8]. The presence of such regulatory action in the broader supplement space shows a pathway for formal enforcement, but the provided material does not show that pathway being used against LipoMax [8].
7. Competing narratives and the company’s defense
There are two competing narratives in the sources: consumer watchdogs and many complainants portray LipoMax’s marketing as deceptive and part of a “scam” playbook [6] [7] [3]. The company’s stated position to BBB is that deep‑fake ads are created by unaffiliated marketers and aren’t authorized, and that it lacks control over affiliate content [1]. That response signals a possible corporate defense if formal legal action were brought — arguing lack of direct responsibility for rogue affiliate ads [1].
8. What consumers and reporters should watch next
Given the volume of complaint reports to the BBB and corroborating watchdog analysis, consumers should document charges, screenshots of ads, and communications; file complaints with the BBB and the FTC; and check court dockets for class actions if they seek legal recourse [1] [2] [5]. The supplied reporting shows high complaint volume and clear red flags, but formal litigation is not documented in the provided materials [1] [2].
Limitations: this analysis relies only on the documents you supplied. I did not find a court case or government lawsuit against LipoMax in those sources; if you want, I can search court dockets, state AG press releases or FTC records beyond these materials.