A restaurant in San Francisco is facing legal action for allegedly deceiving its customers with hidden fees. Alexander Xue filed a complaint on February 13, 2025, in the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, against Woodhouse Fillmore LLC, accusing the company of unlawful business practices.
The lawsuit stems from an incident on February 1, 2025, when Xue dined at Woodhouse Fish Co., a seafood restaurant operated by Woodhouse Fillmore LLC. According to the complaint, Xue was presented with menus that listed food items and their prices. After ordering and consuming his meal, he discovered an unexpected "SF Employer Surcharge" of $6.33 added to his bill without prior notice or consent. This surcharge represented 5.42% of his pre-tax subtotal of $116.50.
Xue claims that this fee was not disclosed anywhere on the menu or any other visible display within the restaurant. He argues that this practice violates several California laws designed to protect consumers from deceptive pricing tactics. Specifically, Xue cites violations of the Unfair Competition Law (Business and Professions Code §§ 17200 et seq.), False Advertising Law (Business and Professions Code §§ 17500 et seq.), and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (Civil Code §§ 1750 et seq.).
In his complaint, Xue alleges that Woodhouse Fillmore LLC engaged in unfair competition by failing to disclose mandatory surcharges affecting product prices and advertising prices they did not intend to honor. He further accuses the defendant of deceptively inducing customer purchases by issuing menus that omitted these surcharges, misleading customers into believing they were paying less than they actually were.
Xue's legal action seeks injunctive relief to prevent Woodhouse Fillmore LLC from continuing such practices and demands refunds for all customers who paid undisclosed fees. Additionally, he requests compensation for legal costs incurred during the lawsuit.
The case highlights a broader issue within the hospitality industry regarding transparency in pricing practices. While some businesses may add surcharges to cover operational costs like employee benefits or city-mandated expenses, these charges must be clearly communicated to customers before purchase decisions are made.
Representing himself pro se in this matter is Alexander Xue. The case has been assigned Case Number CGC-25-622374 at the Superior Court of California in San Francisco County.