Samsung QLED Televisions
Allegations: Falsely marketing that televisions have features that they do not have
In November 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against LG Electronics and Best Buy for allegedly falsely representing the refresh rates (i.e., the number of unique images displayed on television screens each second) of LG LED televisions as 120Hz and 240Hz when plaintiffs claim that the actual refresh rates are 60Hz and 120Hz, respectively. (Lara et al v. LG Electronics U.S.A.; Best Buy Co., Inc. et al, Case No. 17-cv-5222, D. MN.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding televisions and TINA.org’s coverage of the products, click here.
Allegations: Falsely marketing that televisions have features that they do not have
Allegations: Failing to honor its Price Match Guarantee
Allegations: Deceptively marketing programs as free without adequately disclosing that they automatically switch to paid subscriptions unless consumers cancel
Allegations: Offering services to install home security systems without having proper licenses from the state of California or confirming third-party installation companies had the proper licenses
In June 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Best Buy for allegedly falsely advertising the amount of power that INSIGNIA power banks have to transfer to other electronic devices…
June 2019: A state court judge granted final approval of the settlement agreement. March 2018: A state court judge preliminary approved a proposed settlement agreement of this lawsuit. According to…
January 2019: The claims against Best Buy were dismissed for failure to state a claim. 2018: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Samsung Electronics and Best Buy stores regarding the…
In July 2018 a class-action lawsuit was filed against Best Buy alleging that its “0% interest” or “no interest” promotions are really deferred-interest schemes. Specifically, plaintiffs claim that the store…
In February 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Best Buy for allegedly deceptively promoting “0% interest” or “no interest” financing. Specifically, plaintiffs claim that the store misleadingly promises consumers…
January 2016: This action was dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. because the parties reached a settlement. The terms of the settlement are confidential.…
June 2016: A federal judge dismissed the complaint When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled. finding that the complaint made “conclusory…
January 2016: A federal judge dismissed all of the false advertising claims in this class-action, finding, among other things, that the named plaintiff did not sufficiently plead that he relied…
TINA.org is throwing the flag on several Big Game advertisers this year.
The math doesn’t add up for these advertised sales prices.
How the advertising of a free tablet (mis)led two consumers to Best Buy over the holiday weekend.
Free tablet promotion caused consumer confusion by not adequately disclosing terms.
The fine print of Price Match Guarantees.