Retail

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Conclusion to MrConsumer’s Tempur-Pedic Mattress Saga

Costco Tempur-PedicBack in February, MrConsumer told you about his decision to buy a $2,000 Tempu-Pedic Supreme mattress sight-unseen from Costco.com after trying the hardest to learn its specs and test the most similar model in a retail store. This was contrary to his long-held belief and counsel to never buy a mattress mail order. (See original story.)

The mattress and foundation arrived on a cold day in mid-February. The delivery people warned me that it was frozen because it had been in the truck for a long time. And yep, it was literally hard as a rock.

Once it came to room temperature, it still felt very hard despite the fact this was a “medium” firmness mattress, not a “firm” one. Jumping into bed that night felt like hopping onto a board. I am quite familiar with memory foam mattresses having had one for over 10 years, where you only slowly sink into it (and then have to climb out of that hole to roll over). And I was aware that memory foam tends to become firmer when in a cooler environment.

The next day, I decided to heat it with an electric blanket hours before bed to try to soften it up. That worked only slightly, but am I really going to have to use an electric blanket on it even in the summer? I keep my bedroom at 65 degrees year-round, which is right in the optimal temperature range (65° – 75°) for their mattresses according to the Tempur-Pedic website.

I called the dedicated Costco-Tempur-Pedic hotline and was advised to walk on it, to speed up the breaking in process. So for four days in a row, I paced back and forth on every inch of it 15 minutes at a time. It did not make one bit of difference.

To demonstrate how hard the mattress felt even after having it for a week, I made a video showing me knocking and pounding on it like a door and even being able to bounce a half-dead tennis ball off it.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Needless to say, I called Costco-Tempur-Pedic to take back the mattress. And they did so without any pickup fees or hassle (part of the reason I felt protected buying from them in the first place). A few weeks later, I got a full refund.

Lesson learned.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Publix Sued Over Manipulating Package Weights on Sale Items to Hide Overcharges

Publix was recently sued by a Florida consumer alleging that the supermarket chain was systematically overcharging consumers on various products sold by weight such as meat department purchases.

For example, in January 2025, the consumer saw that pork tenderloins were on sale for $4.99 a pound instead of the regular $6.99.

Publix pork from lawsuit

The package she bought was marked with the full price of $6.99 pound, totaling $17.61 for 2.52 lbs. of pork. At the self-checkout, the consumer is shown the sale price of $4.99 a pound, but the weight of the pork has been pumped up by just over a pound, and she is charged $17.61 just as the package is marked — an overcharge of about $5.04.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Publix pork checked out

Irrespective of the finagling of the net weight of the product on the checkout screen, one would hope that most shoppers would recognize that the advertised sale price of this item was not on the package, and therefore she better be sure she is charged the lower sale price when paying. But she isn’t. She is charged the full regular price. Both the screen and sales receipt show that only the regular price was charged, while misleading the consumer into thinking that she saved $7.06.

Now, why does the company seemingly go to the trouble of inflating the net weight of the package on the checkout screen? It is not shown on the receipt and most consumers are not likely to catch the discrepancy between it and what is on the package anyway.

The lawsuit shows example after example just like this one where meat department and other random weight items are only price-marked with the regular price and not the advertised sale price. And for each of those items when purchased, the consumer was charged the full price and did not get the benefit of the sale price.

But, there is something about this case that simply does not make sense. Are all the examples of overcharges alleged in the complaint just the tip of the iceberg at Publix, or is there something about those particular packages that makes them the exception? For example, are most meat items on sale normally labeled with the sale price and thus ring up correctly at the checkout but these are the exceptions?

The Publix PR folks would not comment on the case, nor even answer that simple question. And the law firm that filed the case did not respond to our inquiry either.

So MrConsumer enlisted the help of the former director of the Massachusetts Division of Standards (our weights and measures department) who winters in Florida and lives not far from a Publix supermarket. I asked him to check sale items in the meat department to see if they are properly marked with the advertised sale price or are they like the pictures above from the lawsuit and only have the regular price on them. He confirmed they were all properly marked with the sale price per pound.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Correctly priced packageCorrectly priced sale items found recently by us

In addition, a friend in Florida went to her Publix, and found that the two meat items on sale last week were properly marked with the sale price on the label.

This suggests to me that if the Publix practice is to properly mark sale items with the sale price, then the examples in the lawsuit might have been handpicked deliberately as the few packages that somehow escaped being relabeled when they went on sale. That doesn’t excuse the overcharges on them but means the problem may not be as extensive as the lawsuit might lead some to believe.

What is also strikingly odd is the similarity that this case has to one settled last year against Walmart claiming the exact same thing. Is it possible that two completely independent companies have the same cockamamie checkout software that automatically fabricates the net weight of meat sold to mislead consumers into thinking they saved money?

Please share your thoughts in the comments.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Mattress Firm Sued for Deceptive Sales Practices

Last summer, a California consumer sued the big mattress chain, Mattress Firm, alleging the company inflated the so-called regular price of mattresses that it sold to give customers the sense that they were getting a better bargain than they really were. [We could not obtain a copy of the amended complaint filed last November.]

The consumer’s lawyer alleged that the company rarely if ever charges the stated crossed out price and therefore customers don’t save the amount of money the company claimed.

For example, this mattress was repeatedly advertised promising a savings of $1,200 because it was supposedly “60% off.”

Mattress Firm sample ad

As you can see, it was advertised month after month at the $799.99 price. When, if ever, was it $1999.99? The consumer’s lawyer contends:

*MOUSE PRINT:

… this reference price is a falsely inflated price because Defendant rarely, if ever, lists or sells items at the reference price. The only purpose of the reference price is to mislead customers into believing that the displayed reference price is a former or regular price at which Defendant usually lists and sells the item in the recent past. As a result, Defendant falsely conveys to customers that they are receiving a substantial markdown or discount.

In fact, Mattress Firm in its legal disclaimer, which is buried deep in its website, says that their strikethrough prices are not ones they have actually charged.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Compare at pricing is determined based on price of comparable merchandise of similar quality and circumstances. As a company, we stand behind our compare at prices, based on our market experience and knowledge. These prices reflect nationally competitive MSRP, list prices and do not reflect interim mark-downs, which may have been taken. We invite you to ask about any individual prices.

Since Mattress Firm’s strikethrough prices are unlabeled, shoppers might reasonably conclude that they are Mattress Firm’s own regular or former prices.

Under FTC rules, and the law of many states, including California, sellers have to offer goods at the undiscounted price for a reasonably substantial time in the recent regular course of business (often 90 days) before they subsequently discount them and compare the sale price to the reference price.

Why does the law require “regular” prices to be bonafide? Because consumers love a bargain and are greatly influenced by savings claims.

“By creating an impression of savings, the presence of a higher reference price enhances subjects’ perceived value and willingness to buy the product.” Thus, “empirical studies indicate that, as discount size increases, consumers’ perceptions of value and their willingness to buy the product increase…”

The consumer is suing Mattress Firm for fraud, misrepresentation, and unfair or deceptive business practices. She is seeking money damages and a court order enjoining the company from continuing these types of deceptive sales.

In late January, however, the plaintiff dismissed the case without explanation.

Mattress Firm is not the only bedding retailer being sued. Also in January 2025, two California consumers sued Sleep Number Corporation, making similar allegations. For example, the lawsuit says:

For example, anyone visiting Defendant’s store or Website on a given day who buys a Sleep Number i8 smart bed “on sale” for $2,999 based on a crossed-out reference price of $3,999 is being misled, because that bed has rarely, if ever, been sold in the recent past in Defendant’s stores, on the Website or through other retailers for $3,999. In other words, Defendant’s advertised “sales” for many of its beds are not really sales at all.

What is it about mattress sales that seem to bring out the worst in retailers’ making exaggerated savings claims?