GlitterSniffer Cosmetics: A Quick FDA Update

After the home visits to GlitterSniffer Cosmetics customers began a couple of weeks ago I again  contacted FDA with information regarding the recall. I informed them of the issues regarding the recall in terms of the Enforcement Report, the distribution of the recalled product sent in per the recall FAQ, and pictures showing labeling, possible injury, and the December 2010 photos of Lela's pigment stained hand.

I was contacted by FDA today regarding the GlitterSniffer Cosmetics recall. I responded and am hoping to do a telephone interview this week. There is at least one other person who was contacted and is working on setting up an interview as well.

I am spending the evening putting together a comprehensive list of instances of FDA regulation concerns with GlitterSniffer Cosmetics, in addition to questions I would like answered about the recall. While FDA does not comment on ongoing investigations I am hoping that I can get a few answers to know what has happened thus far.

I have been sent emails from a few people who would like their information passed along to FDA. I plan on including this information as well. If you'd like to supply any information to FDA please feel free to email me.

At some point I do plan on posting about GlitterSniffer Bath, but it appears that will be strictly for purposes of chronicling that it existed, as the shop is now empty and no one has checked in in a month.

GlitterSniffer Cosmetics: The Perfect Storm

One of the overwhelming questions that is asked about the GlitterSniffer Cosmetics debacle is "How did this happen?" It's quite easy as someone standing on the outside looking in to say you would never place another order when you are still waiting delivery of another, or to ask why anyone would ignore clear signs that all was not right in GlitterWorld.

Well, for one thing, not all orders were not delivered. Mine came promptly, efficiently, well packaged, and any communication I had with Lela Warren was polite and friendly. My order was at the end of 2008. A closer look shows that GS didn't really start selling cosmetics to the public at large until late 2008.

Here is the GlitterSniffer Etsy as it appeared in February 2008. No pigments and an open invitation to Lela Warren's MySpace. 

In May 2008 the solid perfumes make their appearance, but again, no pigments.The offer to get to know more about Lela's life is still there.

October 2008, the cosmetics make their appearance. Also of note, GS closes their shop to attend shows. Recognizing they are going to be too busy to do both, they shut down rather than cause any customer service issues.

December 2008 (the time of my order), GlitterSniffer Cosmetics as we now know it is in full swing, with an announcement of a sell out at Detroit Urban Craft Fair 2008.

To be perfectly honest, had I enjoyed the products themselves I would have been a repeat customer of GlitterSniffer Cosmetics. It's understandable, given the way the company started out, that people would continue to trust and buy.

There is also this:

And this:

For those that purchased GlitterSniffer Cosmetics regularly there was much more than just makeup involved, and a brand identity being bought into. The brand identity that was GlitterSniffer Cosmetics was Lela Warren, starting back from the time when she sold DIY craft items. She put a human face to the brand.

There were also rewards for being "loyal" and extras when something went wrong.

When you are emotionally invested in a person, not just as a brand, but as a friend, especially when they haven't ever let you down before (or have made it up to you), you're going to believe them when they say things like this happen:

Customers were also increasingly hit with mixed messages. There are countless instances of Lela asking people to "hop on chat" to discuss GS business, and the invitation to 'friend' her personal profile as another means of communication, but then numerous status updates saying she would not discuss GS business on her personal profile (all while continuing advertising and sales from that same personal page). 

One example of many

And what about those that did decide to question or ultimately sever their relationship with GlitterSniffer Cosmetics? Aside from being deleted and possibly banned from the Fan Page, anyone who spoke out risked the loss of not only their glitter, but friendships with both Lela and some of the GlitterSniffer Fans. It was made very clear there was a price to be paid for disloyalty.

 

Take a larger than life personality that started off doing things the correct way (in terms of customer service), who befriended her customers, offered a unique (though unapproved) product that boosted not only self esteem but also a strong sense of community, and couple that with an environment where it was not only frowned upon to speak your mind but resulted in retribution from several sources, one can see how something like the GlitterSniffer Cosmetics debacle happened. It was these combination of factors that all coalesced to leave us where we are now: Not a word from GlitterSniffer Cosmetics, no refunds, a shattered sense of trust, and an FDA investigation. It was a set of extraordinary circumstances that brought both GlitterSniffer Cosmetics and their customers to where they are today and it is extremely important to be aware of these factors to guard against it ever happening again.

GlitterSnifferCosmetics.com is Gone

It appears GlitterSnifferCosmetics.com is gone.

I tested it in several browsers (Firefox, IE, and Chrome) after clearing cache and cookies to be sure and it didn't load in any of them. People have also tried in Safari and Opera and from mobile phones. Aside from one person who was able to access the site from Safari there were no reports of the site being able to load.

Firefox

Chrome

Internet Explorer

As I posted yesterday there is still a 30 day grace period for the site to be recovered by GlitterSniffer Cosmetics. As far as I could determine the renewal costs just under $25.00.

The recall FAQ is no longer available for the public to be informed. There are bits and pieces on this blog, but they are incomplete. I will be uploading the screenshots in full this weekend to GlitterSniffer Complaints MySpace as it has unlimited free picture uploads. They will be set for public viewing without having to 'friend' the profile.

GlitterSnifferCosmetics.com

According to tucowsdomains.com /whois the domain for GlitterSnifferCosmetics.com is set to expire today. It is my understanding that should GlitterSniffer Cosmetics fail to renew it the domain will be held for a 30 day grace period by the domain holder. It will remain on their server but be inaccessible/unusable. After the grace period there is a chance it will be held for an additional 30-35 days at which point it will either be deleted or sold if there is interest by a third party.

Should the domain be allowed to lapse gone with the site will be the official recall notice and FAQ posted by GlitterSniffer Cosmetics to alert customers that there may be issues with previously purchased products. The Fan Page is still down, but the recall notice was deleted from that page by the company long ago. The recall letters the company stated to FDA that they sent to customers on or around February 7, 2011 have still not arrived. With the domain expiration there will be no official record issued by the company of the GlitterSniffer Cosmetics recall readily available to the public.

I have screenshots of all the recall and FAQ information. I will be uploading them soon so that the information is still available. .

GlitterSniffer Cosmetics: Paypal and FDA-New Information

There have been a couple of developments over the last few days with regards to GlitterSniffer Cosmetics handling of the recall.

A customer who had previously sent a letter from her attorney to GS (which was ignored) requesting a refund of $1,169.15 for all her products and her intent to pursue the matter civilly if it was not remitted in a timely manner contacted Paypal on Monday to inquire about possible recovery of her funds. The customer has several hundred GS pigments and was denied a refund by GS for all of her merchandise. When she inquired about her refund the company denied any of her products were unsafe, despite 92 of them being on the recall list. She then advised the company she would see them in court. The only response she received was a simple "<3".

The injury referenced in the message possibly related to use of GlitterSniffer Cosmetics were corneal abrasions to both eyes, sustained after use of pigments in the Charity Collections. It is unknown which pigments were used specifically, as the customer purchased all three (TWLOHA, GLAAD and ASPCA) and they came in a package together, unlabeled. The customer visited a physician, was unable to wear any eye makeup for a few weeks and continues to this day to have eye sensitivity, despite not having any issues prior to use of GS.

Read from the bottom up

She contacted Paypal at 402-935-2050 and was advised the following:

With the PayPal dispute process, at this point, if PayPal investigates, and if they determine there was fraud, PayPal will start issuing refunds on the claims in the order they were received until the account is out of money. This means, if there is no money in the paypal account, there will be no refunds from PayPal.
The dispute representative did tell me that people could file a small claims court case and have their attorney subpoena PayPal's records regarding a specific seller. If a judge signs off on the subpoena, PayPal would be legally obligated to turn over any and all information regarding a particular seller.
Since I am contemplating a small claims court filing, the information from PayPal would most definitely be of assistance in my case. I am planning to contact my attorney about the subpoena.

According to Paypal if fraud is determined then Paypal would begin paying out claims from money in the GS account until that money is exhausted, though it is currently barred from use by the company itself. This is at odds with the information provided by GS at the time the accounts were frozen, as they clearly stated customers would have to wait 180 days for refunds. Additionally, if a civil case is brought by any individual and a subpoena issued all financial records related to GlitterSniffer Cosmetics would have to be released in pursuit of the matter. Should anyone choose to pursue the matter in this way they would then be privy to any and all financial records Paypal has for both GS accounts. Information such as this could clarify where the money GS earned during its most successful years went, in addition to showing exactly how much was owed in claims and provide further supporting evidence of refunds both issued (currently count: one) and denied by the company.

I posted on May 10, 2011 about a phone call from FDA to a GlitterSniffer Cosmetics customer regarding the recall. The customer was contacted again by FDA on May 18, 2011, this time from the Houston Field Office, Dallas District. The content of the call was the same, and the customer was specifically asked about the recalled pinks. Unlike the last phone call the call was identified by Caller ID as being from FDA. FDA is still apparently pursuing the investigation into the handling of the recall by GlitterSniffer Cosmetics, and the investigation has now spread to a third confirmed Field Office, this time in the South Central portion of the country. The Dallas Field Office is the office I contacted back in January that took one of my original complaints and forwarded it on to the Detroit Office.

GlitterSniffer Cosmetics and the FDA Enforcement Report Followup

I posted about the March 23, 2011 FDA Enforcement Report regarding the GlitterSniffer Cosmetics recall on April 12, 2011. The post outlined concerns with the information provided by GS to FDA, including the lack of receipt of recall letters by GS customers, the number of units distributed, and unapproved mascara not included in the recall.

Today one of the page Admins, ALC, pointed out an item I'd missed during that post. Here is the distribution list provided by GlitterSniffer Cosmetics to FDA in regards to the reach of the recalled products.

According to the information provided by the company to FDA the recalled items affected customers nationwide (US), and in Canada, UK, Taiwan, Australia, Denmark, Spain and Brazil.

On August 4, 2010 blogger Eplefe posted about her experience buying from GlitterSniffer Cosmetics. On March 21, 2010 Eplefe purchased The Super 80's Collection. The Super 80's Collection was recalled by GS in December of 2010 as either containing soap dyes and/or not being FDA approved for use around the eyes. Also interesting to note is that Eplefe's Etsy listing contains absolutely no disclaimer about the collection not being FDA approved, despite GS' continued insistence that it was disclosed in all listings. Eplefe lives in Norway.

On June 9, 2010 blogger Aijuswhanakno posted about her experience with GlitterSniffer Cosmetics. She too purchased the unlabeled Super 80's Collection and initially gave GS a positive review, even amending her review to include the FDA disclaimer from her listing.  After researching she discovered that the Super 80's Collection was not only unapproved for eye use, but was made with soap dyes, which are not approved for cosmetic use at all. She contacted GS and Lela Warren's response was to refund her and state that she had used the colors with no problems at all. At the time of purchase Aijuswhanakno resided in Japan.

Norway and Japan appear nowhere on the distribution list provided to FDA by GlitterSniffer Cosmetics as being affected by the recall. A quick Google search for GlitterSniffer Cosmetics shows that Aijuswhanakno's post regarding the Super 80's Collection appears 4th on the search list. Even given the benefit of the doubt that both of these bloggers Paypal receipts somehow went missing from GS records the information for at least one of them was readily and publicly available and very easy to find. These two instances, coupled with the other discrepancies with the information provided to FDA, beg the question what, if any, information provided to FDA by GlitterSniffer Cosmetics was correct.

It is speculation at this point as to whether these oversights in the information provided FDA were intentional. It could be that the company did not know how many recalled products were sold, or to whom, or where, or that they forgot they ever sold mascara, or that the Dearborn Heights Post Office was having another one of its GS related issues and lost every single recall letter the company sent out in early February. After all, in GlitterSniffer Cosmetics own Recall FAQ posted in January 2011 they stated unequivocally that they would comply with any request made by a federal agency.

Lets Play GlitterSniffer Cosmetics Connect the Dots

This post is a bit of a Mobius strip so please bear with me as post what amounts to a game of GlitterSniffer Cosmetics Connect the Dots.

Dot One: In December 2010 GlitterSniffer Cosmetics announced a recall of all pink pigments and those that were made using soap dyes. A preliminary list was drawn up which contained the 80's Collection. The 80's Collection was on the first and all subsequent lists, including the list provided to FDA, as per the March 23, 2011 Enforcement Report.

Dot Two: On January 9, 2011 GlitterSniffer Cosmetics posted the recall/refund information to their website, including the information that they had already been in contact with FDA.

Dot Three: According to the FDA Enforcement Report from March 23, 2011 GlitterSniffer Cosmetics stated they sent a letter to all of their customers informing them of the recall on or around February 7, 2011, copies of which were provided during FDA home visits to GS customers this month. Per Title 21 Subpart C Section 7.49 a recall communication must contain several items.

(a) General. A recalling firm is responsible for promptly notifying each of its affected direct accounts about the recall. The format, content, and extent of a recall communication should be commensurate with the hazard of the product being recalled and the strategy developed for that recall. In general terms, the purpose of a recall communication is to convey:
(1) That the product in question is subject to a recall.
(2) That further distribution or use of any remaining product should cease immediately.
(3) Where appropriate, that the direct account should in turn notify its customers who received the product about the recall.
(4) Instructions regarding what to do with the product.
(b) Implementation. A recall communication can be accomplished by telegrams, mailgrams, or first class letters conspicuously marked, preferably in bold red type, on the letter and the envelope:“drug[orfood, biologic,etc.]recall[orcorrection]”.The letter and the envelope should be also marked:“urgent”for class I and class II recalls and, when appropriate, for class III recalls. Telephone calls or other personal contacts should ordinarily be confirmed by one of the above methods and/or documented in an appropriate manner.
(c) Contents. (1) A recall communication should be written in accordance with the following guidelines:
(i) Be brief and to the point;
(ii) Identify clearly the product, size, lot number(s), code(s) or serial number(s) and any other pertinent descriptive information to enable accurate and immediate identification of the product;
(iii) Explain concisely the reason for the recall and the hazard involved, if any;
(iv) Provide specific instructions on what should be done with respect to the recalled products; and
(v) Provide a ready means for the recipient of the communication to report to the recalling firm whether it has any of the product, e.g., by sending a postage-paid, self-addressed postcard or by allowing the recipient to place a collect call to the recalling firm.
(2) The recall communication should not contain irrelevant qualifications, promotional materials, or any other statement that may detract from the message. Where necessary, followup communications should be sent to those who fail to respond to the initial recall communication.
(d) Responsibility of recipient. Consignees that receive a recall communication should immediately carry out the instructions set forth by the recalling firm and, where necessary, extend the recall to its consignees in accordance with paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.

Dot Four: GlitterSniffer Cosmetics released the Chocolate Collection on or around February 8, 2011.

Dot Five: This screenshot, undated, shows GlitterSniffer Cosmetics facilitating a sale of product they personally recalled, the 80's Collection. It appears to be near the same date of February 8, 2011 as the exact same announcement regarding the Chocolate Collection is seen posted just below it.

Connect all the Dots and here is the picture that is formed: GlitterSniffer Cosmetics knew that the 80's Collection was recalled in December of 2010, spoke with FDA in January 2011,  provided FDA with a recall letter prior to February 7, 2011 that had to, by law, state that further distribution of the recalled product should cease immediately, and yet on or around February 8, 2011 attempted to facilitate the sale of the recalled 80's Collection knowing that this violated not only the terms of the recall letter but FDA regulations regarding a firm initiated recall.

The company can spew semantics all they wish regarding the business decisions prior to the recall (Quote from the Recall FAQ: "I have had no issues with the pigments, and in turn assumed that other people would not either."). What is not debatable at this point is that the company knew they were violating Title 21 by facilitating the sale of recalled product and yet chose to do so anyway, possibly putting at risk uninformed consumers and those selling the recalled product with the company's assistance. That's not a pretty picture to end up with for the company, their customers or for those they attempted to assist in violation of federal regulation.

I will be following up with FDA to provide them with this information.

5/17/11 ETA: Corrected year in the third to last paragraph from January 2010 to January 2011.