Class Action Claims Chipotle Shortchanged Cash-Paying Customers Amid COVID-19 Pandemic [UPDATE]
by Erin Shaak
Last Updated on October 1, 2024
Fox et al. v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.
Filed: August 20, 2020 ◆§ -
Chipotle has been hit with a proposed class action that claims the company has shortchanged customers who pay with cash at its Pennsylvania locations.
May 16, 2024 – Chipotle Shortchange Lawsuit Dismissed; Plaintiffs Appeal Decision
A federal judge dismissed the proposed class action lawsuit detailed on this page on May 1, 2024, and the plaintiffs informed the court on May 9 that they are appealing the dismissal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.
In a 23-page opinion granting Chipotle’s motion for summary judgment, U.S. District Judge William S. Stickman found that the restaurant’s allegedly deceptive conduct—that is, selling food at higher prices than those listed on its menu—neither misled nor affected the purchasing decisions of either plaintiff.
“The evidence, instead, shows that both plaintiffs were informed that Chipotle could not give exact change, and yet, they still chose to complete their transactions,” the judge wrote.
Judge Stickman pointed out that in order for the plaintiffs to have a claim, they must have purchased the falsely represented product because they heard and believed the false advertising.
However, Judge Stickman noted, one plaintiff’s testimony reveals that she went to Chipotle for the very purpose of being shortchanged, as part of an “experiment” her lawyer wanted to conduct to see if he could pursue a class action against the company. Under these circumstances, no reasonable jury could conclude that Chipotle’s alleged misrepresentations deceived the plaintiff, given that she entered the restaurant knowing she would not receive exact change, the judge determined.
As for the other plaintiff, the consumer testified that he didn’t look at the menu while ordering because he is a “Chipotle regular” who had the prices memorized, the judge noted. Therefore, “[t]he record contains no evidence that relates to [the plaintiff’s] reliance on any false representation made by Chipotle that would convince a jury to believe that Chipotle deceived him,” Judge Stickman wrote.
The plaintiffs’ appeal notice can be found here.
Are you owed unclaimed settlement money? Check out our class action rebates page full of open class action settlements.
Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. has been hit with a proposed class action that claims the company has shortchanged customers who pay with cash at its Pennsylvania locations.
Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.
According to the case out of Allegheny County Court, the chain of fast casual restaurants, which has at least 96 locations in Pennsylvania, has instituted a company policy whereby employees are directed to round down customers’ change to the nearest dollar and pocket the difference for Chipotle’s benefit.
One of the plaintiffs, for example, says she purchased food in August at a Chipotle restaurant in Allison Park, Pennsylvania for a total price of $15.51. Though she handed the cashier a $20.00 bill, she was given only $4.00 in change instead of the $4.49 she was due, the lawsuit says.
“Thus, rather than giving the consumer his or her proper change, or a credit on future purchases, or the benefit of a corporate policy by rounding the purchase price down,” the complaint says, “the purchase price would effectively be rounded up by the cashier (despite what is reflected on the consumer’s receipt) so that Chipotle, and not the consumer, benefits.”
In other words, the suit explains, the plaintiff’s $15.51 purchase effectively cost her $16.00, or $0.49 more than the advertised price, simply because she chose to pay using cash. The second plaintiff claims she had a similar experience at a Wexford, Pennsylvania Chipotle, where she was allegedly given only $11.00 in change instead of the $11.28 that was due.
The case further alleges the receipts provided to the plaintiffs deceptively indicated that they had, in fact, received the proper change, “thus covering up evidence of Chipotle’s improper actions.”
According to the case, Chipotle’s change policy discriminates against customers who do not have, or do not wish to use, credit cards, and allows the restaurant chain to receive a tax-free cash windfall. The lawsuit estimates the policy has benefited Chipotle to the tune of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars, to the detriment of Pennsylvania consumers.
“As a result,” the case says, “Chipotle made a conscious decision to give to itself by enhancing its own profits, rather than giving back to the community.”
The lawsuit seeks an injunction for Chipotle to end its alleged “outrageous and improper” company policy of selling food at a higher price to those who pay with cash and require the company to provide credits to cash-paying customers for future purchases if it fails to provide exact change.
Though the complaint does not mention the national change shortage the Federal Reserve has stated is linked to the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting economic downturn, Frank G. Salpietro, an attorney for the plaintiffs, told Law360 that the crisis “doesn’t give Chipotle the license to line its own pockets at the expense of consumers.”
“[H]iding behind the change shortage to justify taking more money than Chipotle is entitled to receive disproportionately hurts the people who can least afford it—people who lack bank accounts, those who cannot afford or obtain credit cards, youths, and lower-income people,” Salpietro said. “Chipotle could have taken several paths to deal with the coin shortage. Instead they opted to increase their bottom line rather than help their customers in even little ways.”
The full complaint can be read below.
ClassAction.org’s coverage of COVID-19 litigation can be found here and over on our Newswire.
Are you owed unclaimed settlement money? Check out our class action rebates page full of open class action settlements.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.
Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits
How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Did you know there's usually nothing you need to do to join, sign up for, or add your name to new class action lawsuits when they're initially filed?
Read more here: How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Stay Current
Sign Up For
Our Newsletter
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.