Cell Phone Retailer Agrees to Settle Improper Pricing Claims
In an agreement similar to the one recently reached with tech giant Apple, a cellphone and accessories retailer has agreed to change its…
October 13, 2017 at 02:11 PM
4 minute read
In an agreement similar to the one recently reached with tech giant Apple, a cellphone and accessories retailer has agreed to change its sales practices and pay a $60,000 settlement with New Jersey to resolve claims that it violated consumer protection laws and regulations concerning the display of merchandise pricing and refund policies, the state Division of Consumer Affairs announced.
Attorney General Christopher Porrino and Sharon Joyce, the acting director of the DCA, on Oct. 12 announced the settlement with the retailer, Spring Communications, which operates 24 stores in the state.
The settlement with Spring Communications is similar to one the state entered into with tech giant Apple last month regarding its pricing information policies in its 12 New Jersey-based stores.
The DCA alleged that Spring Communications failed to post the selling price for more than 1,000 merchandise items. In addition, the DCA alleged that the company failed to post its refund policy in eight of its stores.
Failing to post selling prices is a violation of the Merchandise Pricing Statute within the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, and failing to post refund policies is a violation of the Refund Policy Disclosure Act, the DCA said in a statement.
Among the types of merchandise Spring Communications sells are car chargers, cellphone cases, car dash ports, earbuds, selfie sticks and USB cables.
“The importance of displaying merchandise pricing and posting refund policies cannot be understated,” said Joyce in the statement.
Investigators from the division's Office of Consumer Protection visited the Spring Communications stores in March 2016. A verified complaint and summary action was filed on June 15, 2017, in the Superior Court Chancery Division in Essex County. The settlement is memorialized in a consent judgment which was filed on Sept. 26.
Spring Communications entered into the settlement without admitting any liability. In addition to the $60,000 payment, Spring Communications also agreed to not engage in any unfair or deceptive acts or practices, to not sell, attempt to sell or offer for sale merchandise without the total selling price being plainly marked by a stamp, tag, label or sign affixed to the merchandise or at the point where the merchandise is offered for sale, and to conspicuously post its refund policy in at least one of four required locations in its stores, the statement said.
In the Apple case, that settlement called for 4½-inch-by-3½-inch “pricing wedges” to be placed on each table where these devices are displayed for sale, to contain the total selling price. The pricing wedges will supplement Apple's existing in-store digital pricing system, which provides price information through apps and notifications that are launched from the devices themselves, Porrino said.
The division alleged that Apple's in-store digital pricing system violated the state's consumer protection laws because the pricing information was not continuously available for customers to view, making it necessary at times for customers to interact with a device or a sales representative to find how much the product costs.
OCP investigators found that while accessories and other items in Apple stores were marked with traditional price tags, the iPhones, iPods, iPads, iMacs, MacBooks and Apple Watches on display for customers to view and use were only priced digitally.
The New Jersey merchandise pricing statute, a part of the Consumer Fraud Act, requires prices to be plainly marked with a stamp, label or sign on or near the merchandise. The purpose of the law is to ensure that consumers know the price of an item as they look at it—and are not required to interact with the device or a sales representative.
During the inspections, the division also found that none of the Apple Stores in New Jersey was in compliance with the Refund Policy Disclosure Act, which requires that a retailer's refund policy be posted in at least one of the following locations: attached to the merchandise itself; attached to each cash register or point of sale, in a place where it is clearly visible to the buyer from the cash register; or posted at each store entrance used by the public.
Apple, which eliminated in-store cash registers years ago in favor of hand-held devices that allow employees to transact sales from anywhere in its stores, agreed to prominently display its refund policy on signs located at the public entrances to its stores, the statement said.
Contact the reporter at [email protected].
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAG Had No Authority to Take Control of Paterson PD, Appellate Division Says
4 minute read'Sad That We Have to Do This': Senate Judiciary Passes Bill Temporarily Addressing Public Notice Crisis
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250