With the pandemic ongoing and people still quarantining in many parts of the world, more and more cases are being filed to hold companies accountable for their questionable business practices during a time of unprecedented hardship. In this issue, we look at two such recent cases: one against Disney regarding auto-payments for annual passholders and one against GEICO over excessive car insurance premiums. Then, in non-pandemic-related news, we’ll touch on lawsuits filed against Walmart and Kroger that you’ll want to know more about if you’re a frequent customer. As always, the latest settlements can be found at the bottom. Read on for more!
When the COVID-19 pandemic first began, Disney World temporarily closed and suspended monthly auto-payments for annual passholders until the parks could reopen. This course of action decidedly made sense. What didn’t make sense, however, was when Disney World reopened in early July and annual passholders found themselves automatically charged for several months’ worth of suspended payments. For instance, the plaintiff in a recently filed class action says he was charged $637 without warning, which placed a greater strain on a family trying to do their best to make it through the pandemic. The lawsuit asserts that the amounts charged by Disney Destinations far exceed what the company is allowed to take – at least when it comes to automatic payments. Moreover, the lawsuit says Disney’s reopening leaves its annual passholders with “severely restricted” access to the parks; the pandemic isn’t over after all. If you hold an annual pass to Disney, read more here.
No, this isn’t an ad for all the questionable purchases you can make on the dark web. We’re letting you know that a proposed class action is claiming that millions of Walmart accounts – and the personal information attached to them – are supposedly up for sale on the dark web and available to the highest bidder. The lawsuit says the information was accessed during an undisclosed data breach that took place within the last four years and may include Walmart account holders’ full names, addresses, financial details, credit card information and other private data. The lawsuit is looking to hold Walmart accountable since a slew of security vulnerabilities within Walmart’s website are supposedly to blame for hackers being able to attack the retailer’s computer systems directly and access, harvest and put up for sale millions of customer accounts. The full story can be found here.
Our settlements page is always being updated. Have you checked to see if you're covered by any open settlements? You can also check out the latest settlements as they happen by following us on Twitter.
A new lawsuit filed against GEICO accuses the insurance provider of unfairly profiting from the global COVID-19 pandemic. According to the suit, GEICO continues to charge excessive premiums for car insurance despite a dramatic decrease in driving and driving-related accidents. Although one report conservatively estimates that drivers are owed at least a 30-percent refund for excessive premiums paid between mid-March and April, the “GEICO Giveback” program – GEICO’s current COVID-19 relief offer – provides a mere 15-percent discount for new and renewal auto insurance policies only, the case says. The complaint claims that the relief program is “woefully inadequate” for drivers who were charged excessive premiums by GEICO. If you’re a GEICO customer and want more, head over to our newswire for the details.
If you drink Kroger brand coffee, you’re probably familiar with the label on the canister that says how many cups of coffee it will make – well, about how many at least. Unfortunately, it turns out that this estimate may be far from accurate. A recently filed class action claims that when you follow the brew instructions on the canister, it will only make half as many cups as the front label indicates. Let’s say one canister says it will make “about 225 cups.” If you followed the accompanying directions to the letter, you’d only get around 110 cups of coffee, which amounts to less than half of what most consumers would rightfully expect, the suit says. The case claims that the product is falsely advertised and that a reasonable consumer wouldn’t know that they’re only getting half as much as what they paid for. A full writeup can be found here.
~ Forward to a friend ~
Know someone who might be interested in our newsletter? Why not forward this email to them?