Customers free to sue department stores for fake sales that make shoppers think they're getting a bargain after judge backs suit against Kohl's

Stores cannot be sued if they hide the fact that an item isn't actually discounted as much as they have advertised.

The new ruling came in California where a judge overturned a class action suit against Kohl's department store.

Now, if consumers find out that they paid more than the advertised discount price on something that they thought was on sale, they can sue the retailer for a sizable payout.

Targeting customers: A California judge ruled that Kohl's cannot show false 'original' prices in hopes of getting customers to think that they are receiving a better deal on the item

The Los Angeles Times reported the change, which only applies in California at the moment.

The issue stems from the legal complaint made by Antonio S. Hinjonos, who argued that he would not have purchased as many items from Kohl's if he knew that there was not as significant of a discount as advertised.

According to the paper, he bought Samonsite luggage because he thought that it was 50 per cent off it's original $299.99 pricetag and he thought he was getting a 39 per cent markdown on polo shirts from the higher price of $36-per-shirt. 

In both cases, those original prices were determined not to be the case, so the discount was not a fair reflection given the true full market value.

Courthouse News Service cites the court filings where Mr Hinjonos said he 'would not have purchased (these) products at Kohl's in the absence of Kohl's misrepresentations.'

Victims: The case came up because one California man (not pictured) argued that he would not have bought certain items if he thought that he was not getting as much of a deal as was advertised

Rights: The judge ruled that customers should expect to be given the full information before their purchase


'Price advertisements matter,' presiding judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote in the finding made by himself and two other judges.

'When a consumer purchases merchandise on the basis of false price information, and when the consumer alleges that he would not have made the purchase but for the misrepresentation, he has standing to sue.'

'Here, Hinojos specifically and plausibly alleges that Kohl's falsely markets its products at reduced prices precisely because consumers such as himself reasonably regard price reductions as material information when making purchasing decisions,' the judge wrote.

Originally the case was dismissed but that ruling was overturned by the 9th Circuit on Tuesday.

Wingspan Portfolio Advisors Blogspot
Posted by