Coleman Warranty Cards Dupe Consumers on Rights, Class Action Claims

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action alleges Coleman’s product warranty cards are unlawful given they fail to explicitly disclose certain warranty rights. 

The 22-page case claims Johnson Controls, Inc., which does business as the outdoor and camping equipment retailer, has deceived consumers by failing to state on warranty cards that the card or form is for product registration and that the buyer’s failure to complete and return the card does not diminish their individual warranty rights.

Per the suit, Coleman is expressly required to include this information on product warranty cards pursuant to California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. 

As a result of its failure to include certain statutory disclosures on product warranty cards, Coleman has been able to “chill” warranty claims and benefit economically, the lawsuit alleges, claiming consumers have been deceived “into thinking they do not have warranty rights unless they fill out the form and provide their personal information to Defendant.” Coleman’s conduct, the case additionally claims, has possibly led consumers to go without the warranties they were promised when they purchased their products given they must now register their warranties, a requirement that was not disclosed at the time of purchase, per the suit. 

“Consumers are thus additionally deceived into purchasing products they would not have, had they known they did not actually come with warranties,” the complaint reads. “Either scenario results in Defendant benefitting at the consumer’s expense.” 

The plaintiff, a Lake County, California resident, relays in the case that he purchased Coleman’s DGAX gas furnace based in part on the representation that the roughly $3,790 product came with a warranty. The plaintiff came to find, however, that the product did not come with a warranty as he was led to believe; in order to receive warranty benefits, the man had to register the furnace, as per the instructions on a card included in the packaging, the suit says. 

According to the lawsuit, Coleman’s warranty registration card and online registration form failed to notify the plaintiff that it was for product registration only, and did not disclose that the plaintiff’s failure to fill out his information and return the card or online form did not diminish his warranty rights.

Upon information and belief, Coleman uses the personal information it collects from warranty cards and online forms for “its own business and marketing purposes and for its own economic benefit,” the complaint says. Per the lawsuit, Coleman intends for its warranty registration cards and online forms to have a chilling effect on warranty claims in that they prevent customers who have not registered, or who choose not to register, their warranties from submitting claims, “thereby saving Defendant money in warranty repair and administration costs.” 

“Had the Product’s advertisement conspicuously disclosed that the warranty was contingent on registration by Plaintiff providing his personal information, Plaintiff would not have purchased the Product, or alternatively would not have paid a premium for the Product,” the suit says. 

Initially filed in Lake County Superior Court on March 30, the case was removed to California’s Northern District on July 2.  

Removed to California federal court last month was a proposed class action that alleged Bissell Homecare, Inc. also failed to include certain mandatory disclosures on warranty cards and online forms, with the plaintiffs, Cleanview Vacuum, Bissell Powerease Swivel Pet Rewind Vacuum and Bissell Power Force Vacuum buyers, claiming the company similarly aims to chill warranty claims. 

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.