A class action filed against TJ Maxx Companies Inc., alleges that the company’s website is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, because it discriminates against blind customers.
The class action contends that the retailer “is denying blind individuals throughout the United States equal access to the goods and services TJ MAXX provides to their non-disabled customers through” the company’s website, including “a wide array of the goods, services, price discounts, and other programs offered by TJ MAXX.”
According to the class action, TJ Maxx runs a chain of over 1,000 retail stores that sell clothing and home items, and also offers apparel for sale on the company’s website.
The complaint asserts that “[d]espite readily available accessible technology,” TJ Maxx’s website contains “many access barriers preventing blind people to independently navigate and complete a purchase using assistive computer technology.”
The TJ Maxx discriminatory website class action lawsuit states that there are 8.1 million people who are visually impaired in the U.S., and they are protected by the ADA and state human rights laws.
The ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in any “public accommodation,” such as TJ Maxx stores and its publicly assessable website. Such discrimination includes “failure to make reasonable modifications” so people with disabilities can enjoy the same “goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations” as others.
The class action argues that technology exists and is readily available to assist the visually impaired with surfing the internet, such as screen reading technology, but it requires certain website features to be usable.
Plaintiff David DiCarlo states that he is legally blind, and he “cannot use a computer without the assistance of screen reader software.” DiCarlo claims that he last attempted to purchase items off of the TJ Maxx website in January 2017, but was unable to.
The complaint asserts that “well-established guidelines” have “been in place for at least several years” to make websites accessible by the blind. The World Wide Web Consortium and the federal government have published standards for websites accessibility, which include using invisible alt-text behind graphics so screen reading software can explain images to the blind.
These standards also make sure that website functions can be used with a keyboard and not just a mouse, and employ headings so blind people can navigate around a site more easily.
According to the ADA class action, the TJ Maxx website contains none of these standard website features, and thus denies blind consumers equal access to the company’s website.
The lawsuit requests certification of a Class of “all legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted to access tjmaxx.com and as a result have been denied access to the enjoyment of goods and services offered in TJ MAXX Stores.”
The complaint also requests a subclass of all New York residents who are blind and denied access to TJ Maxx’s website, for its alleged violations of New York state law.
The class action seeks compensatory damages, statutory damages, and an injunction requiring TJ Maxx to “take all steps” necessary to make its website accessible by the blind.
DiCarlo is represented by C.K. Lee and Anne Seelig of Lee Litigation Group PLLC.
The TJ Maxx Discriminatory Website Class Action Lawsuit is David DiCarlo v. The TJ Maxx Companies Inc., Case No. 1:17-cv-00717, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
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 – 2026 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
3 thoughts onTJ Maxx Class Action Says Website Discriminates Against Blind Customers
Received a credit from this settlement today ;)
Opps! Wrong lawsuit… I did get a credit from TJMaxx but it was a different lawsuit from years back out of California…
Opps! Wrong lawsuit…