![]() ![]() ![]() For instance, she says that the Foot Locker website does not include “any explanations of how ‘list’ prices were determined.”Īs for her individual harm, Willis asserts that she purchased items from Foot Locker between July 2020 and present, and the products “were advertised as being on sale, even though no indication was provided as to those products’ previous prices.” Because the “sale” items in at issue “were not, in many instances, regularly sold at the previous prices, notwithstanding the previous prices were not always even disclosed,” Willis claims that she “expected she was getting better deals than she actually was,” and was damaged as a result. Setting the stage in her complaint, Willis asserts that in its brick-and-mortar stores, Foot Locker routinely offers sales for its products that are “frequent and non-specific.” For instance, Willis cites sale claims, such as “SALE! 60% OFF!,” “This weekend only: Save an extra 40%!,” “Special Savings for !,” and “List: $299 Our price: $199.” The problem, per Willis, is that such discounts are “not really discounts at all, but attempts to mislead,” as such sale prices are not actually mark downs from what products were originally priced at. The issue is compounded, Willis alleges, as Foot Locker does not disclose how it arrives at its pricing. In the complaint that she filed in a New York state court in King’s County on July 3, Plaintiff Teretta Willis claims that the New York-headquartered footwear retailer is not only taking advantage of consumers by way of “misleading” sale prices, it has been employing an “‘urgency’ dark pattern” in an attempt to dupe consumers into believing that products are low in stock and then getting them to act on that false sense of urgency. Foot Locker is making “unfair, misleading, and deceptive representations” about the prices of its products, according to a new lawsuit. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |