Timex class action alleges deceptive email subject lines violated Washington spam law

Timex class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Plaintiff Charles Cultrara filed a class action lawsuit against Timex Group USA Inc.
• Why: Cultrara claims Timex violates Washington’s Commercial Electronic Mail Act (CEMA) by sending emails with false urgency in the subject line.
• Where: The Timex class action lawsuit was filed in Washington federal court.

A new class action lawsuit claims Timex violates Washington’s Commercial Electronic Mail Act by sending emails with false urgency in the subject line.

Plaintiff Charles Cultrara filed the complaint, claiming the company sends Washington residents emails with subject lines designed to create a false sense of urgency. 

“Timex spams Washington consumers, including [the plaintiff], with commercial emails whose subject lines employ various tactics to create a false sense of urgency in consumers’ minds — and ultimately, from consumers’ wallets,” the Timex class action lawsuit alleges.

Cultrara claims the spam emails steer consumers away from shopping for better deals to Timex’s products and services, which they are falsely led to believe must be purchased now.

The Timex class action lawsuit asserts claims for violations of Washington’s CEMA and Consumer Protection Act. Cultrara seeks to represent a class of Washington residents who received Timex spam emails during the class period.

Timex emails used deceptive ‘false urgency’ tactics, lawsuit alleges

Cultrara claims Timex uses false urgency to manipulate consumers into making purchases. He says the Federal Trade Commission has identified “false limited time messages” as a deceptive practice that pressures consumers to buy immediately by saying the offer is good only for a limited time, or that the deal ends soon.

The Timex class action lawsuit includes examples of emails sent to consumers with subject lines such as “Ending Soon 31% OFF,” “Last Chance for 31% OFF” and “Flash Sale Extended.” Cultrara claims Timex often extends the promotions after the advertised deadlines, proving the falsity of the subject lines.

Cultrara alleges Timex’s use of false urgency harms consumers by distorting their decision-making and causing them to make purchases they might otherwise not have made. He also claims the practice harms market competition by causing consumers to ignore legitimate scarcity claims from other sellers.

The Timex class action lawsuit demands a jury trial and requests injunctive relief and an award of actual or liquidated damages, trebled, for Cultrara and the class members. 

In a similar case, a consumer accused language-learning app Babbel of spamming Washington consumers with “limited-time” discounts.

What do you think of the allegations made in this Timex class action lawsuit? Tell us in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Samuel J. Strauss of Strauss Borrelli PLLC; Lynn A. Toops, Natalie A. Lyons and Ian R. Bensberg of CohenMalad LLP; and J. Gerard Stranch IV, Michael C. Tackeff and Andrew K. Murray of Stranch, Jennings & Garvey PLLC.

The Timex class action lawsuit is Cultrara v. Timex Group USA Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-00445-BJR, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• AppFolio class action alleges hidden fees on rent payments
• John Hancock voiceprint ruling highlights limits of Illinois biometric privacy law
• Ford recalls more than 100,000 Mustangs due to safety concerns
• GM class action alleges coolant leak defect affects Chevrolet, GMC and Buick vehicles