Coleman ‘Unlawfully and Deceitfully’ Chills Customers’ Warranties on its Products, Class Action Alleges

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.

Outdoor equipment company Coleman uses unlawful and deceitful business practices to chill customers’ warranty claims and dupe them into thinking they did not have warranty rights, a new class action lawsuit alleges.

The class action lawsuit was filed in California on July 2 by lead Plaintiff Randy Scott, who alleges Coleman’s parent company Johnson Controls, Inc. violates California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and Unfair Competition Law.

Scott alleges that Coleman tricks consumers into thinking they do not have warranty rights unless they fill out a product registration form and provide their personal information, which violates the law.

“Or even worse, consumers actually do not have the warranties that were promised to them when they purchased their products as they must now register their warranties, a requirement that was not disclosed at the time of purchase,” the claim reads.

Scott bought a $3,790 DGAX Gas Furnace from Coleman on May 15, 2020, that was accompanied by the company’s express warranties, according to the class action lawsuit, but he later found out that the product did not come with a warranty.

“Contained within the Product’s packaging were instructions requiring Plaintiff to ‘register’ the Product’s warranty online in order to receive the complete benefits of the warranty,” the class action claim states.

However, the warranty registration card and online registration form failed to inform Scott that it was for product registration only — and it also failed to add that if Scott did not complete and return the card or online form he would not lose his warranty rights.

“Defendant tricks consumers into providing their personal information in order to obtain a warranty when the consumers are not required to share their personal information to obtain the benefit of an express warrant,” the claim alleges.

The class action lawsuit further alleges that Coleman uses the personal information it collects from such cards and online forms for its own business and marketing purposes and for its own economic benefit. “Defendant has no right to access personal customer information through warranty registration for these purposes, by not making the legally mandated disclosures to customers,” the claim reads.

California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act requires a manufacturer who chooses to provide a warranty or product registration card or form to include statements that inform the consumer that the card or form is for product registration and that failure to complete and return the card or form does not diminish the individual’s warranty rights.

The claim alleges that Coleman intentionally omits any such statements that are expressly required by the SBA.

“Upon information and belief, Defendant intends for the warranty registration card and online form to have a chilling effect on warranty claims, preventing customers who have not registered, or who choose not to register, their warranties from making warranty claims, thereby saving Defendant money in warranty repair and administration costs,” the claim alleges.

Scott wants to represent anyone in California who has purchased a Coleman product. He is suing for violations of California’s Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and Unfair Competition Law and seeks certification of the Class, damages, restitution, legal fees and costs, and a jury trial.

Have you purchased any outdoor equipment from Coleman? Let us know your experience in the comments section!

Scott is represented by Jason A. Ibey, Esq. of Kazerouni Law Group, APC.

The Coleman Express Warranty Class Action Lawsuit is Scott v. Johnson Controls, Inc. in the Superior Court Of The State Of California, County Of Lake – Lakeport Division, Unlimited Civil.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Owners of $84K Exclusive Dodge Demon Muscle Car File Class Action Lawsuit
• What Does the New York Lemon Law Cover?
• Logitech Alert System $850K Class Action Settlement
• Philips Knew of CPAP Problems Before Recall, Claim Class Action Lawsuits