Plaintiffs and other similarly situated class members have been deceived and suffered economic injury. Had Plaintiffs and other class members known that Defendant Amazon fails to provide the marketed benefits of the Product and fails to deliver items within the advertised time frames, they would not have purchased the Product or would have paid significantly less. Plaintiffs and Class Members paid for the Product because they reasonably believed, based on Defendant Amazon’s advertising of the Product that they would receive items purchased from Defendant Amazon’s online store within two days. Many reasonable individuals decide where to buy a specific item based on how quickly the potential retail location for the purchase will deliver the ordered item.ĭefendant Amazon, aware of how critical shipping speeds are to buyers, deliberately deceive consumers by purposely marketing the Product in a false and misleading manner, and lying to consumers about the purported shipping and delivery benefits that will receive when they buy the Product. Undoubtedly, shipping speeds are a highly important attribute to consumers. Here are some of the specific allegations the plaintiffs say are common to all claims: Yet, after completing his/her purchase, the buyer is provided with a longer delivery day or simply told that the item is delayed in transit and no expected delivery date is provided. That is, when a person who has bought the Product, i.e., paid for an “Amazon Prime” membership, s/he is shown a specific delivery date. However, after these consumers purchase the Product, and buy an item identified as one that qualifies for the Product’s same-day or two-day delivery speed, they do not receive the item within two days or within the same day.ĭefendant Amazon’s second deceptive tactic involves changing the delivery date of a purchased item midway, during its transit. First, when consumers purchase the Product, they are shown advertised claims that the benefit of the Product includes free shipping within two days or the same day. Consumers who purchase the Product, and subscribe to the Amazon Prime Membership, are often waiting substantially beyond the same day and more than two days for ordered items.Ĭonsequently, Defendant Amazons’ deceptive marketing tactics for the Product play out in two key ways. Likewise, purchase of the Product does not confer the benefit of delivery within two days or within the same day. However, in reality, the Product does not provide actually provide its advertised benefits. Amazon markets specific benefits that consumers will receive by purchasing the Product, including “same day” or “two day” delivery and shipping speeds. (“the Product”) on a statewide and nationwide basis. Through its uniform advertising claims, Defendant Amazon misrepresents its “Amazon Prime” membership. Value Added Resource has obtained a copy of the original complaint, which alleges false advertising and consumer harm. et al is still an open case as the court has been waiting for proof that the defendant, Amazon, has been properly served. Liz Morton ~ Founder Published: Updated: Feb 22 2023īrittain et al v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |