Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.

Washington Citizens Tired of Home Depot and Lowe's Deceptive Promotional Programs

Report Fraud
Case ID: 3233 | Consumer Products | 03/12/2004

A class action has been filed against Home Depot, Lowe's, and Monogram Credit Card Bank of Georgia on behalf of Washington consumer's, who allege that the stores’ enticing promotions actually force them to pay significantly more interest for existing or future balances in violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act. The action seeks unspecified compensatory and triple punitive damages.

The action alleges that the two stores, in association with Monogram Credit, make a particular “promotional” offer to customers whereby they may purchase goods with no payments and no interest for periods of up to 12 months. The offer is only good for purchases of $299 or more, and may only be taken advantage of by customers to open a credit card account for Home Depot or Lowe's credit card provided by Monogram. Once customers make the promotional purchase, there allegedly encouraged to use the card to make other regular purchases. The action alleges that customers actually only received the benefit of the interest-free promotional purchase if they never used their credit card for any other purchases during interest free period.

Monogram allegedly operates the credit cards so that payments for customers’ regular non-promotional purchases are only paid after the promotional balance is paid off. Take, for example, the following: a customer buys a washing machine for $1000 on a promotional purchase for six months interest-free using a Monogram credit card, and then the next month buys a $200 chainsaw using the same card. The action alleges that any payment to customer makes on the credit card channel it first go to pay off the $1000 promotional purchase, and that the $200 purchase would not be cleared, but instead would be left to gather interest. Allegedly, Monogram’s response to complaints is that it maintains the right to allocate payments to accounts in its “sole discretion.”

The action alleges that, by concealing its manner of applying payments to purchases, Monogram and the conspirator stores engage in a deceptive scheme that violates Washington law.


At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints.

Other Consumer Products Cases of Interest

U.S. District Judge John Corbett O’Meara ruled that the city of Detroit’s anti-ticket scalping ordinance is unconstitutional and unenforceable where sellers are offering tickets to sports and concert events for face value or less.
 
A national class action has been filed in Illinois against Sprint Communications Company, L.P. The action is brought on behalf of all U.S. residents, who are not Sprint customers, but who have had unauthorized charges added to their phone service by Sprint. The action is brought under the federal Communications Act and federal common law and seeks disgorgement of profits, penalties, compensatory damages and injunctive and declaratory relief.
 
On line and in stores, mail-in-rebates have taken hold, and advertisements declaring discounts "after mail-in-rebate" are seen everywhere.
 
The parties have reached a tentative $15.25 million settlement in a class action filed against sportswear company Ashworth, Inc., (Nasdaq:ASHW) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between September 4, 1997, and July 15, 1998. A claims deadline had apparently not yet been set as of July 9, 2004. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement should contact the attorneys for the class for more information.
 
The Illinois Appellate Court has upheld a ruling favorable to the plaintiffs in a class action filed against Blockbuster Entertainment, Inc., on behalf of persons who have been charged excessive fees after April 1, 2001, when they failed to return videos, returned them in damaged condition, or returned videos past their due date.
 
Several class actions have been filed against power utility Canadian Superior Energy , Inc. (AMEX:SNG, TSX:SNG) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between November 17, 2003, and March 11, 2004. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities.
 
Become a LawCash Member - FREE!
'Find Money' E-Book
Weekly Email Alerts




privacy policy
YouNewz Beta
IT'S FREE

Report

Report Newz and easily upload your own newzworthy photos from your cell phone or computer to the web.

Share

Quickly share your photos with family, friends, co-workers, or the world with your own Newzpaper.

Read

Instantly find Newz and photos from other YouNewzers and read other YouNewzers Newzpapers.
 
Class Action Lawsuit Center || Product Recall Center || Consumer Complaint Center || About LawCash Link Exchange
Privacy Policy || Legal Policies || Terms & Conditions || Website Advertising Policy || Site Map || Top Lawsuits
LawCash® is a service of nola3, llc
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.

[ Home ]
LawCash
login
Justice is a click away.