CVS pays $2 million in overcharging, misleading-ads suit settlement

[cal04]

Source: Los Angeles Times

Drugstore giant CVS Pharmacy has agreed to pay more than $2 million to settle a lawsuit alleging that the company took part in misleading advertising and overcharged customers for sale items.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Maureen Duffy-Lewis signed the final judgment this week after Los Angeles, Riverside and Ventura counties' district attorneys filed the civil complaint Aug. 11.

In the complaint, the Rhode Island-based CVS was accused of routinely charging customers more money for items advertised at a sale price since 2006. The complaint also said CVS used misleading advertising when it failed to provide an immediate discount for certain advertised items.

(snip)
CVS will also create a three-year pricing program to make sure customers aren’t overcharged in the future, and conduct weekly in-store price inspections to make sure all prices are accurate. The drug store will also implement a “Scan-right” program guarantee where consumers will receive up to $2 off an item if it's scanned at a higher price than advertised.

Read more: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/08/cvs-pharmacy-pays-2-million-in-overcharging-misleading-ads-case.html

[Cirque du So-What]

1. Well, that's just ACES for Californians (at least those in greater LA)

but what about all the other states where CVS does business? IMO, companies who engage in such practices need to learn the true meaning of 'punitive damages.'

[Sherman A1]

2. Scan-right with $2 off?

What a buch of horse-hockey

If it doesn't scan correctly the item should be Free.

[pam4water]

11. I had an item that didn't scan right for weeks at Giant Eagle grocery. I got it free but

they make you go stand in line at the "customer service desk" to get your money back. I ask a ditzy bleached bond assistance manager, who happen to be standing by the register, "shouldn't the item be free if is scans wrong?" She said, she'd never heard of that law and would only give me the difference off the price when you ring out. I found a manager eventually and she owned up to the law but said I had to buy it first at the wrong price then get a refund form customer service.

[Sherman A1]

12. Where I work there is a key on the register for the Free

item. Management must be involved, but it's done at the register and usually fairly quickly (no system or procedure is perfect). I believe it is indeed a law that was created when shelf pricing was introduced and individual items were no longer marked, but it may just be policy. It's been a long time and I am not involved with that part of the operation.

[IamK]

14. At Kroger I got a $20 ham for free because it did not ring at the sale price...

I felt guilty but probably made up for other times I got ripped off.... The manager just had to hit something on the register...

[RebelOne]

3. I have a feeling that CVS is in trouble.

The one on a main road here in North Georgia closed overnight with no advance notice and no sign on the door saying they had moved to a new location.

[SoapBox]

4. Not even a surprise...and I've had it happen at Walgreen's too.

...and then if you tell the minimum-wage-part-time-temporary employee at the register, you usually just get the
slack-jawed look and "uhhhh...I don't know about it" response.

[freeplessinseattle]

9. happened to me a few times there too, not cool. n/t

[Paper Roses]

5. Wish I had been in on this suit. I posted this before.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=442x283

I've had it with CVS. This seems to be common with them. You might not even notice unless you make notes on the sale prices and double check as they ring the items up on the register.

[cal04]

6. You might want to read this too. We all need to watch more closely, everywhere

thanks for the link to your post

Supermarkets Slapped With Nearly $1 Million in Consumer Violation Fines

http://www.dnainfo.com/20110819/manhattan/supermarkets-slapped-with-nearly-1-million-consumer-violation-fines

Supermarkets across the city racked up nearly $1 million in fines this year for violations ranging from overcharging customers to mislabeling and improperly taxing merchandise, Department of Consumer Affairs Commissioner Jonathan Mintz announced Thursday.

And soon they might have to pay even more under proposed legislation. The “Grocery Shoppers Have Overcharge Protection (SHOP) Act” would triple current city fines - which begin at $25 to $300 - and compensate customers by giving them any overcharged items for free as well as 10 times the amount they were overcharged.

DCA found that just 41 percent of the 1,980 supermarkets inspected in ramped-up efforts across the city managed to pass without violations. That was even worse than last year’s low of 48 percent, when more than $380,000 in fines were issued.

The numbers were even more dismal in Manhattan, where just 38 percent of the nearly 250 supermarkets inspected were deemed compliant — the worst of any borough in the city. Offenders included nearly every major chain, ranging from Fairway, Whole Foods and Gristedes to C-TOWN and Associated.

[Wednesdays]

7. 2 million isn't even a slap on the wrist

Shoot, two million's barely the worth of a few of their buildings...if that.

[bluesmail]

8. My very first thought. They won't even miss it! n/t

[AlabamaLibrul]

10. CERTAINLY much less than they actually got from the overcharges (nt)

[No Elephants]

13. I've read so many bad things about CVS--getting prescriptions wrong being the most dangerous.

[LaydeeBug]

15. I've never heard of getting something for free if it didn't ring up at the advertised price. nt

[Sherman A1]

16. It's policy where I work

If it doesn't ring at the advertised price (and you catch it, because obviously the checker is just scanning the stuff and has no idea as to the prices on the shelf), you get the item free. It is limited to one free item and the remainder if any are sold at the newly corrected retail. I do believe it to be the law, (instituted when scanners were installed in the late 1970's or early 1980's and items were no longer individually marked) but I could very well be wrong on that.

[pam4water]

17. It's a law that has been in place since they OK ed UPC and scanners. Back when

there were people in government who thought consumer protection was a worth while thing. In exchange for not having to put price on the items you buy, the law said you had to give the item free, if it did ring up to the posted price. It's a good way to keep the store honest. But I'm sure 99% of the people have forgotten the price by they time they get to the register. I remember when the scanner first started.