Best Buy to Pay $633,570 in Settlement of Consumer-Protection Violations
Source: District Attorney of Santa Barbara County
Santa Barbara County District Attorney Joyce E. Dudley announced today that her office, together with the District Attorneys of Alameda, Riverside, and San Diego Counties, settled a consumer-protection action against Best Buy Stores, L.P., a major retailer of electronics products. The case centered on Best Buy’s pricing accuracy and its return policy. The Complaint alleges that Best Buy misrepresented the price of items sold and failed to accurately disclose material aspects of its return policy, among other violations.
The Santa Barbara County Weights & Measures Department discovered pricing-accuracy violations, as did multiple other weights and measures departments across the state. The Final Judgment requires Best Buy to institute changes in its business practices to ensure that the problems identified in the Complaint do not recur. These include a renewed pricing-accuracy program and enhanced disclosures of return policies. Without admitting liability, Best Buy agreed to pay $449,065 in civil penalties, $109,505 in costs, and $75,000.00 in restitution. Of these funds, the Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s Office will receive $112,266 in civil penalties and $20,000 in costs. The Santa Barbara County Weights & Measures Department will receive $3,840 in costs. As required by California law, the civil penalties will be used for the enforcement of consumer-protection laws.
District Attorney Dudley said, “Consumers are entitled to being charged the lowest-advertised price, and to return policies with clear and conspicuous terms. We are grateful that Best Buy cooperated and agreed to modify its practices. If you believe you have been the victim of consumer fraud you can file a complaint with my office and we will investigate it, no matter the size of the company.” The District Attorney website explains how to submit a consumer complaint form: http://countyofsb.org/da/civ_consumer_protection.html. Consumer complaint forms are available in English and Spanish.
7 Comments
-
2
-
-
Feb 22, 2021 12:14 PMIt is bizarre to me that these cases result in NO repayments to consumers who were defrauded. I suppose I can understand that the money, apparently, goes to further enforcement. But it still seems funny and not quite right.
-
1
-
1
-
Feb 22, 2021 01:09 PMYes, the money goes to "enforcement", which means to salaries of public employees. And it was public employees that made that law. Suspicious? A smaller amount does go to "restitution".
-
-
-
Feb 23, 2021 11:22 AMIt's not that I find it suspicious. It's that the true victims in these cases (consumers) seem to be the only involved entity that is never made whole. Attorney's fees are paid, DA's budget is covered++, but restitution is an afterthought.
-
3
-
-
Feb 22, 2021 06:33 PMComplaining that money goes to the public employees when the at fault malfeasor ass that cheated us is such a cheap shot. Can't you anti-government folks get the reality that without government (public employees) this sort of shady business dealing would be even worse?
-
-
1
-
Feb 22, 2021 10:31 PMHow do you explain it when some public employees of a government are doing the shady dealing? Do they "have the authority"? Do they have free rein to cheat "the public" they work for? Are they held accountable, ever? Sometimes we can't vote them out.
-
1
-
1
-
Feb 23, 2021 11:17 AMRHS, I welcome discussion, and I assure you that I am most certainly not anti-government. I understand the concept that by punishing them now, it will theoretically happen less in the future. Yes, it protects future customers (maybe), but it doesn't quite seem fair to me for customers who were already taken advantage of to not be made whole. Were there only 72k worth (the restitution amt) of damages to consumers? I wish they would make that clear. If that was not the case, and I would bet on that, why does the DA not go for the full amount of damages for restoration?
I suppose I am, in part, just sick of these massive, government-subsidized businesses taking advantage of the little guy and getting little more than a slap on the wrist.
-
-
-
Feb 23, 2021 11:19 AMOof, sorry for typos - 75k (not 72k), and "restitution" (not restoration)