Class action over ‘fake’ discounts at Eddie Bauer outlet stores moves forward

Eddie Bauer false discount class action overview:

• Who: A Washington federal judge has denied Eddie Bauer’s motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit filed by plaintiff Susan Clark.
• Why: Clark claims Eddie Bauer misled consumers by using false and misleading reference prices to advertise discounts.
• Where: The Eddie Bauer false discount class action lawsuit was filed in Washington federal court.

Eddie Bauer will have to face claims that it misled consumers with false and misleading reference prices to advertise discounts now that a Washington federal judge has denied the retailer’s motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit.

Plaintiff Susan Clark claims Eddie Bauer’s outlet stores in Oregon perpetually sell clothing items at discounted prices, resulting in inaccurate and deceptive reference prices on the sales tags.

Clark argues Eddie Bauer’s practice amounts to “a massive false discount advertising scheme,” according to the Eddie Bauer class action lawsuit.

She says she purchased three garments at two Eddie Bauer outlet stores in Oregon in March 2017, all of which were subject to a 50% discount at checkout. Clark alleges she reasonably relied on Eddie Bauer’s representations regarding the reference prices and advertised discounts for the three products.

“Had she known the truth, she would not have purchased the products at the prices she paid,” the Eddie Bauer class action says. 

The plaintiffs are bringing a single claim under Oregon’s Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA), seeking money damages, equitable restitution, a permanent injunction, and the certification of a class action.

Eddie Bauer argued Clark failed to file the class action within the statute of limitations

Eddie Bauer argued in its motion to dismiss that Clark failed to file the class action lawsuit within the UTPA’s one-year limitations period. 

The judge disagreed, however, finding Clark’s lawsuit to be timely. The Eddie Bauer lawsuit argued: “the UTPA statute of limitations begins to run when the plaintiff knows or should have known of the allegedly unlawful conduct,” and that the hidden pricing was reasonably difficult for an ordinary person to uncover.

The court also found that Eddie Bauer’s use of the phrase “comparable value” on its sales tags, in place of a reference price based on the garment’s claimed fictitious full retail price, violated the UTPA.

Earlier this year in February, clothing retailer Saks OFF 5th agreed to a $15M class action resettlement to resolve allegations it artificially inflated prices before its sales.

Have you ever purchased clothing from an Eddie Bauer outlet store? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Che Z. Corrington, Daniel M. Hattis and Paul Karl Lukacs of Hattis & Lukacs PLLC.

The Eddie Bauer false discount class action lawsuit is Susan Clark v. Eddie Bauer LLC, et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-01106-RAJ, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Smoke alarm class action claims devices fail to alert consumers of fire
• Top product recalls in March included dangerous SUVs, car seats and acne products
• Bunch O Balloons class action says popular water balloons are toxic to kids
• Class action says True Classic Tees tacks on hidden shipping fees