Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
A proposed class action lawsuit against Walmart over its temporary pandemic return policy was allowed to inch forward after a judge ruled employees of the retail giant inconsistently applied rules about whether consumers can return goods.
U.S. District Judge Jesus Bernal upheld two of six causes of action that plaintiffs alleged against Walmart, allowed plaintiffs to amend three other claims and dismissed another claim at the retailer’s request.
The judge’s order, filed Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, allows a lawsuit filed by three California residents who purchased items at Walmart stores this spring to continue moving through the courts, in part, following Walmart’s attempt to get the case dismissed.
Lead plaintiff Danielle Hubmer filed the complaint against Walmart on behalf of herself and other potential Class Members, who the plaintiffs say could number in the hundreds of thousands. Two other named plaintiffs, Kelly Schwalback and Angela O’Brien, were later added to the complaint.
Hubmer says a class action lawsuit is proper in this case because given the size of claims of individual Class Members, “few, if any, could afford to seek legal redress” individually. Once the defendant’s liability is established, the class action lawsuit will “permit an orderly and expeditious administration” of Class Members’ claims, TCA previously reported.
The three women claim they each purchased items at different Walmart locations in Southern California during April, May and June 2020.
In Hubmer’s case, she purchased $151.99 worth of clothing and exercise equipment at a store in Temecula on April 25. At the time she was shopping, the dressing room at the store was closed, so she was not able to try on any of the clothing items she planned to purchase, according to the Walmart class action lawsuit.
Two days later, when she attempted to return her purchases, the store manager refused to accept the items for return, citing a new COVID-19 return policy, and told Hubmer they would never be eligible for refund, according to the complaint.
The Walmart return policy was not posted in the store, the lawsuit alleges.
Schwalbach and O’Brien each had similar experiences when attempting to return items they purchased in April and May.
According to the Walmart class action lawsuit, store managers refused to accept items they purchased for return, citing the new return policy that allegedly was not posted at the store locations they patronized, in Upland, San Jacinto and Murrieta. In O’Brien’s case, she was also allegedly told her items would never be eligible for return.
Walmart posted the temporary return policy on its website June 15, 2020, stating returns had been “paused” on “food, paper goods, home cleaning supplies, laundry soap, pharmacy, health & beauty and apparel items.” It also said it had reopened returns on some of these items in some states, and continued the “pause” on other items amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Judge Bernal said the retailer’s argument as it attempted to dismiss the case is flawed in that the temporary Walmart return policy posted on its website “is not the same temporary return policy to which its store managers subjected plaintiffs.”
“Defendant claims that its online Temporary Return Policy ‘did not ban returns,’ but its store managers told plaintiffs that they would never be able to return their goods,” the judge wrote. “Defendant’s managers across multiple stores were clearly implementing a different policy than is posted on its website. Posting that policy would have clarified things for Plaintiffs — and for Defendant’s own employees.”
The complaint alleged six causes of action, including violation of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act, fraudulent and unfair business practices, as well as unlawful business practices in violation of the California Business and Professions Code, breach of contract, violation of a state law requiring “conspicuous display” of a retailer’s return and exchange policy and negligent misrepresentation.
The judge dismissed the first three claims but allowed plaintiffs to amend them to cure factual deficiencies and file an updated complaint by Nov. 25.
The judge tossed the sixth claim, negligent misrepresentation, agreeing with Walmart that it is barred by the economic loss doctrine.
The remaining two claims, about breach of contract and “conspicuous display,” will be considered as the case moves forward.
Have you tried to return items to Walmart during the pandemic? What was the result? Let us know in the comments.
The plaintiffs are represented by Mitch Kalcheim of Kalcheim Law Group PC.
The Walmart Return Policy COVID Class Action Lawsuit is Danielle Hubmer, et al. v. Walmart Inc., Case No. 5:20-cv-01369-JGB-KK, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Coronavirus Lawsuits & Legal Issues
Since the COVID pandemic shut down the country, Top Class Actions has been keeping you up to date on the latest Coronavirus lawsuits and legal issues.
Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
675 thoughts onWalmart Must Face COVID-19 Return Policy Class Action Lawsuit
Yes, I’d gone there to buy some hair clippers that their website said they had in store normally I would’ve purchased online & picked up in store but I had several other items that I needed to get so I just went to the store mind you the pandemic had already begun so I waited in line outside for I don’t know 20 mins give or take when I finally hour inside the first item on my list was the clippers however they didn’t have them in stock & the employee who helped me said she hadn’t had them in stock for at least a month & helped me pick out a different option I asked her if I don’t like them or they don’t get the job done (really thick curly hair) could I return it without hesitation she said “yes absolutely we don’t want u to be unsatisfied with any of our products” so of course they weren’t as good as she & the packaging had said. So I started the return online to make it safer & easier to do the return all went smoothly online but after waiting in line again to get in I went straight to returns clippers & receipt in hand & was told “I’m so sorry ur not happy when them but there’s nothing we can do we’re can’t take them back unfortunately ur stuck with them unless u can sell them on Facebook or somewhere” I went through the big run around her about what the employee had said & she just shrugged it & said “I’m sorry but they were wrong”
Needless to say I wasn’t happy & I still own these crap clippers
I was told the same thing ln several different items I tried to return with a receipt they also told me I could never return them. Im in Phoenix AZ
Yep it was like that innocent also. I bought chicken that said boneless and u took it back because it had bones in it and to tell them to take them off the shelf. They said they don’t do returns and they buy the meat like that so nothing they could do. A few weeks later I bought some meat that was expired.. they didn’t care.. for months they wouldn’t take back returns.
Yes, Walmart continue to deny refund in Oakland Maryland for purchases and go as far as calling you a thief without any proof. Walmart does not return anything anymore but claims they do nor do they have policy posted or can even tell you when asked what new policy is in effect. We are out tons of money from bad products or just not wanted products. We have attempted to return a daily laptop with the extended warranty that now they claim is past covered date because they gave the run around in order to claim that and then fruit trees in the total of $500 bucks that all died and was returned within timeframe along with the tree root to the store. Walmart gave refund only to reverse it from the credit card resulting in us having tons of phone time to this day trying to recover the money.
Please add me, thank you!
I had the dame experience at the same exact store. I bought about 80$ worth of cloths at the Temecula store while the changing rooms were closed and they would not let me return it the next day after trying them on at home. There was nothing posted or said to me when I checked out about the “new” return policy. I went back every week for months trying to return the cloths and they wouldn’t let me. I called corporate and tried returning to other stores with no luck. I moved to another state and tried returning to them and they refused. Literally all the GM had to do was override the return in the system and she refused because the cloths out of season now. Even though I was repeatedly told from the Temecula store and corporate that I would eventually be able to return the cloths.
Bought hundreds of dollars worth of scrubs and other clothes. Can’t try them on. Needed for work. Lost my new job from covid and Walmart refused to return them only used one set others were too big. Still 8 mons later cAnt return them
I tried to retun shorts I paid 14.99 for and they wanted to give me 1.00 back.
I attempted to do 2 different returns at different times during pandemic. Told not accepting returns. Had to hold onto and do when they started accepting rhem again, regund would not occur until then.
Please add me
Add me