Sherwin-Williams Tacks On “Supply Chain Charge” Class Action

Supply-chain problems have disrupted our ability to purchase even the most ordinary of products lately. The Sherwin-Williams Company has recently taken to adding a 4% “supply chain charge” to customer bills, the complaint for this class action alleges. It claims this is a “bait and switch” device, because when customers get to the registers, they are charged more for their purchases than the prices displayed when they selected them.

Two classes have been defined for this action:

• The Florida Class is all persons in Florida who, within the applicable statute of limitations, bought something at a Sherwin-Williams store and was charged a 4% surcharge.
• The Nationwide Class is all persons who, within the applicable statute of limitations, bought something at a Sherwin-Williams store and was charged a 4% surcharge.

As in most stores, at Sherwin-Williams displays prices for the items it sells. Consumers understand that these are the prices they will pay if they buy the items, the complaint alleges, but the true price for each item is 4% higher than the price shown. Only after consumers have selected the items, and chosen colors and other particular—that is, the complaint says, “after the purchase process is substantially complete”—does Sherwin-Williams add the additional charge to the displayed prices.

“Worse,” the complaint claims, “the so-called ‘Supply Chain Charge’ is never reasonably disclosed to consumers until it shows up as a line item on their receipts—after the purchase is complete.”

The charge is deceptive for another reason, the complaint alleges: Sherwin-Williams “knows full well that average consumers do not understand the meaning of the term ‘supply chain’ nor the indirect effect that economists understand it has on prices. Reasonable consumers are not economists.”

The complaint alleges that the company is deliberately using “a technical-sounding term in order to falsely convey to consumers that it was passing through an out-of-pocket cost it paid.” This is false, the complaint claims, because Sherwin-Williams did not pay the “supply chain” a 4% increase. Instead, the complaint asserts that Sherwin-Williams simply wanted to raise its prices throughout the store by 4%.

While the company is free to raise its prices if it wants to, the complaint alleges, this manner of doing it is false and deceptive. It faults the company in three ways: First, it says that the in-store prices displayed are false and deceptive. Second, it claims that the in-store price inflation is not really a “supply chain charge.” And finally, it objects to the company applying it only as the purchase is being completed, as a small line item on the receipt which customers may not notice.

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer
Tags: Breach of Contract, Deceptive Business Practices, Deceptive Pricing/Undisclosed Surcharges, Unjust Enrichment