Lowe's Hit With Fresh Lawsuit, Massive Discount Pricing Scheme Exposed

Lowe’s faces another class action lawsuit alleging the home improvement giant engaged in a “massive and consistent” false discount advertising scheme, with plaintiff Michael Hern claiming the company deceived consumers by advertising perpetual discounts on products that were rarely, if ever, sold at their advertised reference prices. Filed in Washington federal court in December 2025, this marks the latest in a series of similar consumer protection cases against the retailer.

The allegations strike at the heart of retail pricing practices: Hern purchased blinds and a refrigerator advertised as discounted, only to discover these same products were routinely offered at identical “sale” prices—meaning the discounts were fake.

What the Lawsuit Alleges About Lowe’s Pricing Scheme

The class action claims Lowe’s pricing tactics caused consumers to pay more than they otherwise would have and to purchase items they may not have bought without the supposed discounts. The scheme allegedly operated both in physical stores and online, targeting major product categories including:

Bali and Levolor-brand blinds and shades
Major appliances (refrigerators, ranges, dishwashers)
Microwaves, wall ovens, and cooktops
Freezers, washers, and dryers

According to the complaint, Lowe’s ignored long-standing regulatory guidance on comparative price advertising, failing to ensure reference prices reflected genuine former prices rather than inflated figures designed to manufacture urgency or perceived savings.

The lawsuit argues that consumers were tricked into believing products had substantially higher market values than reality, making the “discounted” prices appear to be special bargains when they were actually regular prices.

Legal Claims Filed Against Lowe’s

Hern’s lawsuit alleges Lowe’s conduct violates Washington’s Consumer Protection Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts in trade or commerce. The plaintiff seeks restitution and disgorgement of all revenues, profits, and unjust enrichment associated with Lowe’s sale of these allegedly falsely discounted products to Washington consumers since at least April 2021.

Lowe’s has denied the allegations and removed the case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act, citing the size of the proposed class and the amount in controversy. The case is now proceeding as Hern v. Lowe’s Home Centers LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-02502, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

This Isn’t Lowe’s First Pricing Rodeo

The December 2025 lawsuit represents just the tip of the iceberg. Lowe’s has faced multiple similar legal challenges throughout 2024 and 2025:

March 2025 North Carolina Cases

Two additional class actions were filed in North Carolina, with plaintiff Prescila Lovell seeking to represent California consumers and plaintiffs Lance and Shauni Wright representing Oregon consumers who purchased products advertised with discounts. These complaints targeted the same product categories and alleged the same deceptive pricing patterns.

California Price Overcharge Settlement

In September 2025, Lowe’s was ordered to pay $1 million to settle a civil lawsuit filed by district attorneys from Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Sonoma, and Alameda counties, alleging the company charged prices higher than the lowest advertised or posted prices and falsely advertised accurate prices for products.

Between 2018 and 2022, Lowe’s received price accuracy violations in 10 California counties, with 4.4 percent of items overcharged and an average overcharge of 19.3 percent. The settlement included mandatory store-level changes, enhanced staff training, and periodic price audits across all 110 California stores.

Lowe's Hit With Fresh Lawsuit Massive Discount Pricing Scheme Exposed

What Consumer Protection Law Says About False Reference Pricing

The FTC gets its authority to investigate allegations of consumer fraud from the Federal Trade Commission Act, which includes the FTC Guides Against Deceptive Pricing, setting limits on when companies can use former price comparisons in advertisements.

Federal regulations require that:

The original higher price referenced in an ad must have been openly and actively offered for sale, and any former price mentioned in an advertisement must have been offered honestly and in good faith.

If a retailer advertises that they’re selling below prevailing area prices, they should be reasonably certain that the higher advertised price doesn’t appreciably exceed the price at which substantial sales are being made in the area.

The FTC provides a clear example of deceptive pricing: a retailer who temporarily raises a product’s price to create an artificial “former price,” then cuts it back to the regular price while advertising a “Terrific Bargain”—exactly the type of scheme Lowe’s allegedly employed.

State laws often provide even stronger protections. California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act, False Advertising Law, and Unfair Competition Law, along with Oregon’s Unlawful Trade Practices Act, all prohibit misleading or deceptive pricing in commerce.

Similar Cases Against Other Retailers

Lowe’s isn’t alone in facing false reference pricing litigation. Recent class actions have been filed against L.L. Bean, Under Armour, and Sleep Number Corp., all alleging companies advertise false discounts to trick consumers into believing they’re getting better deals than they actually are.

Major retailers including Overstock.com, which was ordered to pay almost $7 million by California regulators, and Amazon, which settled a deceptive advertising case for approximately $2 million, have faced similar penalties for comparison pricing violations.

The pattern is clear: aggressive enforcement is increasing across the retail industry as regulators and consumers push back against deceptive pricing tactics.

What Happens Next in the Lowe’s Case

The Washington lawsuit remains in early stages. Key upcoming developments will likely include:

Class Certification Decision

The court must determine whether to certify the case as a class action, which would allow all Washington consumers who purchased allegedly falsely discounted products from Lowe’s to join the lawsuit.

Discovery Process

Plaintiffs will seek access to Lowe’s internal pricing documents, including:

Historical pricing data showing how long products were sold at various price points
Internal communications about pricing strategies
Training materials for employees regarding discount advertising
Marketing materials and promotional calendars

Potential Settlement or Trial

Given Lowe’s September 2025 California settlement and the company’s track record of resolving similar cases, a settlement appears likely. However, if the parties can’t reach an agreement, the case could proceed to trial, potentially setting new precedents for retail pricing practices.

What Legal Experts Are Saying

Consumer protection attorneys emphasize that false reference pricing cases hinge on proving the “former price” was artificial rather than genuine. Federal law is less clear than California law about specifying timeframes for establishing prevailing market prices, with the FTC stating companies must maintain a price for a reasonable length of time before reducing it.

The challenge for retailers is determining what constitutes “reasonable.” California law is explicit: any prices used during the previous 90 days may be referenced. Other states have less clear guidance.

Consumer Reports estimates the average family of four loses more than $3,200 per year to deceptive fees and pricing practices, a figure that becomes even higher for significant purchases. This explains why plaintiffs’ attorneys are aggressively pursuing these cases—the economic harm to consumers is substantial.

What Lowe’s Shoppers Need to Know

If you purchased products from Lowe’s based on advertised discounts, you may have legal rights:

Document Your Purchases

Save receipts, take photos of price tags, and screenshot online product pages showing discount claims. This documentation could be crucial if you join the class action.

Watch for Class Action Notices

If the court certifies a class, Lowe’s will be required to notify potentially affected consumers. Keep an eye on your mail and email for official notices.

Check Your State’s Laws

Consumer protection laws vary by state. Some states have stronger protections and longer statutes of limitations than others.

Consider Filing Complaints

You can file complaints with:

Your state Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division
The Federal Trade Commission at ReportFraud.ftc.gov
Your county weights and measures department

Implications for Retail Pricing Practices

This wave of litigation signals a fundamental shift in how retailers can advertise discounts. Several trends are emerging:

Increased Regulatory Scrutiny

The California settlement required Lowe’s to designate merchandising services managers responsible for pricing accuracy, eliminate automatic weekend price increases when price-change staff aren’t present, and conduct quarterly price audits of at least 30 items in each store.

Expect similar requirements to spread to other states and retailers.

90-Day Verification Requirements

Courts are increasingly requiring that reference prices be reverified every 90 days, with disclosure to consumers of the verification date and clear explanations that comparison prices may not reflect prevailing market or regular retail prices.

Technology Solutions

Retailers are investing in pricing compliance software to track historical pricing data, ensure reference prices are legitimate, and flag potential violations before they reach consumers.

Stricter Internal Policies

The best defense against class action demands is proof of compliance with the law based on sound internal policies and procedures. Forward-thinking retailers are implementing rigorous pricing governance frameworks.

Could This Become a Nationwide Class Action?

While the current lawsuits are state-specific, there’s potential for consolidation or expansion. Lowe’s removed the Washington case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act, citing the size of the proposed class and the amount in controversy—suggesting the company anticipates significant litigation costs.

If plaintiffs can demonstrate Lowe’s used the same pricing scheme nationwide, we could see a multi-state or even nationwide class action similar to other major retail pricing settlements.

What Compensation Might Be Available

If the lawsuit succeeds, affected consumers could receive:

Actual Damages

Reimbursement for the difference between what you paid and what you should have paid if pricing had been honest.

Statutory Damages

Many state consumer protection laws allow statutory damages per violation, which can be $500 or more per transaction in some jurisdictions.

Injunctive Relief

Court orders requiring Lowe’s to change its pricing practices, provide clearer disclosures, and implement compliance monitoring.

Attorneys’ Fees

Consumer protection statutes typically allow prevailing plaintiffs to recover attorneys’ fees, encouraging lawyers to take these cases.

FAQs About the Lowe’s Pricing Lawsuit

Q: How do I know if I’m affected by the lawsuit?

A: If you purchased products from Lowe’s that were advertised with “sale” or “discount” prices, particularly Bali or Levolor blinds, major appliances, or other items with reference prices crossed out, you may be affected. The Washington lawsuit covers purchases since April 2021.

Q: Do I need to do anything right now?

A: Not immediately. If the case is certified as a class action, you’ll receive notice and can decide whether to participate. However, documenting your purchases now is wise.

Q: Can I join the lawsuit if I don’t live in Washington?

A: The current Washington lawsuit is limited to Washington purchasers, but similar cases in California, Oregon, and North Carolina cover consumers in those states. Additional cases may be filed in other jurisdictions.

Q: What’s the difference between this case and the California settlement?

A: The California case involved charging prices higher than the lowest advertised or posted price (scanner overcharges), while the current lawsuits focus on false reference pricing where products are advertised as discounted from inflated “regular” prices that were rarely or never actually charged.

Q: Has Lowe’s admitted wrongdoing?

A: No. Lowe’s has denied the allegations, and in the California settlement, the company didn’t have to admit liability.

Q: How long will the lawsuit take?

A: Class actions typically take 1-3 years to resolve, though some complex cases can take longer. Settlement negotiations could accelerate the timeline.

Q: What should I do if I think Lowe’s overcharged me?

A: Document everything: save receipts, take photos of price tags, screenshot web pages. File a complaint with your state Attorney General and the FTC. Consider consulting a consumer protection attorney about your individual rights.

Q: Are other home improvement retailers facing similar lawsuits?

A: Yes. Home Depot, Ace Hardware, Harbor Freight Tools, and True Value Hardware have all been named in strikethrough pricing and false reference pricing litigation.

Q: What’s “false reference pricing”?

A: It’s when a retailer shows a higher “original” or “regular” price crossed out next to a lower “sale” price, but the higher price was never actually charged or was only briefly offered. This creates the false impression of a significant discount.

Q: How can I verify if a discount is real?

A: Check price tracking websites, compare prices across multiple retailers, look at the retailer’s price history using browser tools or apps, and be skeptical of “permanent sales” where products are always marked down.

The Bottom Line

The December 2025 Washington lawsuit against Lowe’s alleging massive and consistent false discount advertising joins a growing wave of consumer protection litigation targeting deceptive retail pricing practices. With Lowe’s already paying $1 million to settle California price overcharge allegations and facing multiple similar cases across the country, the home improvement giant faces significant legal and reputational exposure.

For consumers, these cases represent an important accountability mechanism. 64.8 percent of all U.S. deceptive pricing cases since 2014 have been filed in California, but enforcement is spreading nationwide as state attorneys general and private plaintiffs’ attorneys recognize the widespread harm from false discount advertising.

The litigation will likely reshape retail pricing practices, forcing companies to implement stronger compliance systems, provide clearer disclosures, and ensure advertised discounts reflect genuine savings rather than marketing manipulations. Whether through settlements or court judgments, affected consumers may eventually receive compensation—though the bigger victory may be deterring future deceptive pricing across the entire retail industry.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe you’ve been affected by false discount advertising, consult with a qualified consumer protection attorney in your state.

About the Author

Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah

Lowe’s Hit With Fresh Lawsuit, Massive Discount Pricing Scheme Exposed