Pella Class Action Says Window Screens Are Too Small for Frames

Pella Corporation manufactures defective windows with screens that are too small to fit in the window frames, according to a class action lawsuit filed this week in Florida federal court.

Plaintiff Andrew Sturdivant filed the Pella class action lawsuit on behalf of himself and other consumers who purchased the series 250 double hung windows with conventional fiberglass screens and series 350 patio doors with conventional fiberglass screens.

He asserts that the windows are defective because the screens are too small to fit in the window frames, “leaving a gap through which pests and debris can, and did, enter the homes of Plaintiff and other Windows purchasers.”

This gap prevents the window screens from performing their primary function of keeping debris and insects from entering the building, according to the Pella class action lawsuit.

Sturdivant says he noticed the window defect and asked Pella to fix it, but Pella refused. He alleges a Pella representative told him that “Pella could not and would not fix it because that’s how Pella’s Windows were made.”

Sturdivant says he purchased three Pella 350 series patio doors and 12 Pella 250 series double-hung windows from Lowe’s in October 2015.

According to the Pella window class action lawsuit, he paid more than $16,000 in total.

After the windows were installed in his home by Lowe’s contractors, he observed that there were 3/8-inch gaps between the tops and bottoms of the screen frames and window frames.

He contacted Lowe’s about the issue and Lowe’s put in an order for new screens.

According to the Pella class action lawsuit, the new screens arrived on Mar. 8, 2016. This time, a Pella representative installed the screens.

However, Sturdivant observed the same issue with the new screens and complained about the gaps at the tops and bottoms of the screens.

The Pella representative promised to order longer screens and installed the new set of screens on Apr. 28, 2016.

“However, the screens were, again, exactly the same: too short,” according to the Pella window screen defect class action lawsuit.

Sturdivant complained to the Pella representative who informed him that there was nothing more Pella would do about the screens.

Finding that he had no other options, Sturdivant kept the Pella window screens even though they did not fit the frames.

“The defect significantly undermines the utility of the windows and doors and prevents them from being used as intended: when the windows are open, pests and debris enter Plaintiff’s home,” the Pella class action lawsuit asserts. “When the window/doors are closed, pests and debris collect between the screen and window, requiring constant cleaning.”

The Pella window screen defect class action lawsuit brings claims for breach of express warranty, violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and breach of the implied warranty of merchantability.

Sturdivant is seeking prejudgment interest, restitution, injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees and costs. He also seeks an order revoking his acceptance of Pella’s allegedly defective window screens.

Sturdivant is represented by John A. Yanchunis of Morgan & Morgan Complex Litigation Group and Kristi Stahnke McGregor, Andrei V. Rado and Charles Slidders of Milberg LLP.

The Pella Window Screen Defect Class Action Lawsuit is Andrew Sturdivant v. Pella Corporation, Case No. 6:16-cv-01776-ORL-40GJK, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.