Quantcast

Retail Giant Accused of Deceptive Pricing Practices by Consumer Class Action

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Tuesday, November 26, 2024

Retail Giant Accused of Deceptive Pricing Practices by Consumer Class Action

State Court
770f5b5d ecde 4dc7 8e94 c76b0df834a6

judge and hammer | https://www.pexels.com/

A class action lawsuit has been filed against a major retail corporation, accusing it of engaging in deceptive pricing practices that mislead consumers into believing they are receiving significant discounts. The complaint was lodged by Pamela Cho on July 12, 2024, in the Superior Court of California for the County of San Francisco against The Gap, Inc., Gap (Apparel) LLC, and Gap International Sales, Inc.

The case revolves around allegations that the defendants have perpetuated a years-long campaign to deceive customers through false reference and discount pricing at their Gap Factory outlet stores and e-commerce website. According to the complaint, the defendants advertise inflated "original" prices alongside lower "sale" prices to create an illusion of substantial savings. This practice is said to manipulate consumers' perceptions of value and induce them to overpay for merchandise. Cho's legal team cites various academic studies and consumer behavior theories to support their claims that such false advertising schemes lead consumers to believe they are getting a better deal than they actually are.

Cho argues that these deceptive practices violate several laws, including California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), False Advertising Law (FAL), Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), and the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA). Specifically, the complaint states that these laws prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce and false advertisements. Cho seeks monetary damages, restitution, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief to halt these alleged unlawful practices.

The lawsuit details how Cho was personally affected by these deceptive practices when she purchased items from a Gap Factory outlet store in Milpitas, California. She believed she was receiving significant discounts based on the advertised prices but later realized that the "original" prices were never actually offered. The complaint includes examples of other similar cases where courts have found such pricing schemes unlawful.

Representing Cho are attorneys Todd D. Carpenter, Scott G. Braden, and James B. Drimmer from Lynch Carpenter LLP. The case is being overseen by Judge Austin Lam under Case ID CGC-24-616357.

More News