Legal Newsline

Monday, August 19, 2019

Consumer claims Brandsource zero percent interest promotion was misrepresented

By Noddy A. Fernandez | Mar 29, 2018

LOS ANGELES (Legal Newsline) – A Michigan consumer claims a furniture seller deceptively represented its zero percent interest purchases on store-brand credit at its retail locations.

Ruth Stinson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a complaint on March 19 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Brandsource Inc., doing business as Furniture and Mattress Warehouse over alleged violation of the California False Advertising Law and other counts.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that between Sept. 26, 2015, and Oct. 16, 2016, she made two purchases from defendant's store because of the zero percent promotion offered by defendants. She alleges a salesperson told her she would receive 12 months with no interest. 

"Plaintiff was hit with $850 dollars in interest charges on a $2,800 in furniture purchases - even though she had made all required payments on time and had paid off over $1,000 of her balance at that time. She would not have entered into such a purchase if the in-store marketing had told her of this massive penalty for failure to pay off in full," the suit states.

"The Brandsource salesperson never informed plaintiff that if she failed to pay off the entire balance of the account before the end of the 12-month promotional period, she would be required to pay interest on the entire purchase price retroactive to the initial date of purchase," the suit states.

The plaintiff holds Brandsource Inc. responsible because the defendant allegedly "affirmatively misrepresented and/or did not disclose sufficient facts to render non-misleading its statements about the 'zero percent interest' or 'no interest' promotion offered in connection with its promotion of its store credit. These misrepresentations or omission include, inter alia, that its purported 'zero percent interest' or 'no interest' promotion was in fact a deferred-interest scheme, that the purported 'zero percent interest' or 'no interest' promotion would result in retroactive interest fees being assessed against the consumer," according to the suit.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment for actual, statutory, punitive and exemplary damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs, disbursements, and such other relief as the court deems just and proper. She is represented by Jeffrey D. Kaliel and Sophia Goren Gold of Kaliel PLLC in Washington, D.C. and Jeff Ostrow and Scott Edelsberg of Kopelowitz Ostrow Ferguson Weiselberg Gilbert in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Case number 8:18-cv-00435-JLS-JDE

Want to get notified whenever we write about any of these organizations ?

Sign-up Next time we write about any of these organizations, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

Kopelowitz Ostrow U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

More News