fbpx

Pro Sound Gear Partial Fulfillment of Orders, False Refunds Class Action

Pro Sound Gear, Inc. (PSG) portrays itself as selling professional DJ, lighting, recording, and audio equipment. Its website claims it offers “Best Price + Plus Guarantee,” but the complaint for this class action alleges that its offers are false and that it does not keep its promises, about the gear it purports to be selling or about its refunds.

The class for this action is all individuals who, between February 7, 2018 and February 7, 2022, bought good from PSG, tried to obtain a refund within thirty days of their purchase from PSG, and did not receive a full refund.

The complaint sums up its allegations in a single sentence:

PSG “as a matter of practice, engages in deceptive conduct by: falsely advertising the sale of goods that it has no intention of actually selling; intentionally shipping goods that are either defective or different than what people ordered; and then to make matters worse, issuing fake refunds to complaining consumers and then sending consumers on a wild goose chase by falsely claiming the consumer’s bank must not have processed the refund correctly.”

Plaintiff Lisa Alexander tried to buy studio equipment from PSG in April 2021. On April 24, since the equipment had not arrived, she initiated a dispute with Citibank, her credit card company. PSG then told her the equipment would be delivered soon, the complaint alleges, so she canceled the dispute. However, according to the complaint, only part of the order was delivered, and PSG told her they would not be able to complete it and offered to make a refund if she was not satisfied.

Alexander shipped the equipment back to PSG, and on May 26, the complaint alleges, PSG told her it had issued her a refund. However, the complaint claims, PSG “issued her a fake refund, and created a fake and fraudulent notification that it had issued a refund back to her card.”

Alexander kept checking her credit card statements, looking for the refund, the complaint says, and also calling Citibank.

The complaint claims, “After extensive conversations with Citibank, [Alexander] eventually discovered that the ‘refund’ was fake, and that [PSG] had generated false and fraudulent transaction numbers for the ‘refund.’”

By the time she discovered this, however, the complaint alleges, the deadline to dispute the charge on her credit card had passed and she was liable for PSG’s charges. According to the complaint, even after that, PSG again told her that they really did issue a refund and that the problem was with her bank.

The complaint quotes PSG’s website as saying, “We maintain an A+ rating with the Better Business Bureau,” and that they have a “top-level retailer rating with BizRate.” But according to the complaint, the company’s rating with the Better Business Bureau (BBB) is F, with thirty-eight complaints in thirty-six months.

A BBB alert has asked the company to substantiate some of the claims at its website, but PSG has not done so.

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer

Most Recent Case Event

Pro Sound Gear Partial Fulfillment of Orders, False Refunds Complaint

February 7, 2022

Pro Sound Gear, Inc. (PSG) portrays itself as selling professional DJ, lighting, recording, and audio equipment. Its website claims it offers “Best Price + Plus Guarantee,” but the complaint for this class action alleges that its offers are false and that it does not keep its promises, about the gear it purports to be selling or about its refunds.

Pro Sound Gear Partial Fulfillment of Orders, False Refunds Complaint

Case Event History

Pro Sound Gear Partial Fulfillment of Orders, False Refunds Complaint

February 7, 2022

Pro Sound Gear, Inc. (PSG) portrays itself as selling professional DJ, lighting, recording, and audio equipment. Its website claims it offers “Best Price + Plus Guarantee,” but the complaint for this class action alleges that its offers are false and that it does not keep its promises, about the gear it purports to be selling or about its refunds.

Pro Sound Gear Partial Fulfillment of Orders, False Refunds Complaint
Tags: Deceptive Advertising, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Negligent Misrepresentation, Unjust Enrichment