Pixel 6 Charging Slowly? Class Action Says Google Misleads Users on Faster Charging Speeds
Klang v. Google North America Inc.
Filed: February 17, 2023 ◆§ 1:23-cv-01316
A class action alleges Google has misled consumers into believing its Pixel 6 smartphones have faster charging speeds by claiming the devices can charge up to 50% in 30 minutes.
New York
A proposed class action alleges Google has misled consumers into believing its Pixel 6 smartphones have faster charging speeds by claiming that the devices can charge up to 50 percent in 30 minutes.
Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.
According to the 11-page lawsuit, Google fails to disclose that in order to achieve faster charging speeds, a consumer must buy the company’s $25 30W USB-C charger separately. Even then, the case says, lab testing published by Android Authority has shown that the maximum power obtained by the Pixel 6 and Pixel 6 Pro from the separate 30W charger is just 22 watts, far below the supposedly mythical 30-watt charging that “many have (quite fairly) assumed the Pixel 6 series is capable of.”
All told, despite Google’s Pixel 6 fast-charging promise, and despite the belief among users that the device can charge halfway in 30 minutes (and, by extension, fully charge in an hour), a full charge of the smartphone on a near-empty battery takes over two hours, the lawsuit alleges, pinning blame for the issue on the Pixel 6’s failure to fully utilize its 30W charging capacity.
“Since fast charging uses more power at the beginning during the battery’s constant current phase, it reaches 50% in about 30 minutes,” the complaint relays. “However, the next 50% takes three times as long, with the power gradually reduced to 2.5W, not 30W.”
Per the case, Google’s 30W USB-C charger saves users only 10 minutes of charging time compared to the prior 18W model.
“Defendant misrepresented and/or omitted the attributes and qualities of the Product, that it would draw power at 30W for a significant amount of time when plugged in, a full charge would take not much more than an hour, and that the 30W charging provided a more meaningful benefit than saving 10 minutes in exchange for having to pay an extra $25.”
As for why the Google Pixel 6 does not use its 30W charging capacity, the suit posits that, first, reducing the device’s power draw can be useful in “controlling temperatures and reducing battery stress,” which results in longer charge times. Second, testing has confirmed that the Pixel 6, whose 128GB version reportedly retails for around $550, uses a “virtually identical charging algorithm” as previous versions of the device, “albeit with minimally more power.”
“Had the Pixel 6 utilized a different charging algorithm, it would be able to take advantage of the promised faster charging speed,” the suit claims.
According to the complaint, there is no indication that the USB Power Delivery Programmable Power Supply (PPS) charging protocol—which allows for certain devices to charge faster, more efficiently and with less heat produced—is used to better optimize the Pixel 6’s charging speed over that of previous versions of the device.
Third, the lawsuit continues, the conditions outlined in a lengthy Google Pixel footnote disclaimer describing how the phones’ charging speed was calculated “are not equivalent to those experienced by most Pixel 6 owners,” who use their phones while charging and “inevitably are not always charging new batteries.”
The suit says that Google’s decision to move to “an entirely new charging standard” has caused Pixel 6 users’ accessories to be “no longer compatible” while ultimately offering “only 4W more power supplied and 10 minutes saved.”
“A purchaser will not expect that a new type of charger, costing $25, will only save them 10 minutes, especially in light of the prominence of the ‘fast charging’ claims,” the suit contests.
The lawsuit looks to cover consumers in New York, Arkansas, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho and Alaska who bought a Google Pixel 6 during the applicable statute of limitations period.
Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.
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.