Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

BBB’s National Advertising Division Sides with Mouse Print* and Against Lowe’s on Misleading Ads

Several months ago, we told you the story of a Lowe’s TV commercial that promised “20% off major appliances $396 and up,” but the hard-to-read fine print excluded virtually all the major brands: “Whirlpool, Maytag, KitchenAid, Amana, GE, LG, Samsung, Frigidaire, Electrolux and Bosch brands limited to a maximum 10% discount, unless otherwise shown.”

Outrageous, right? After Mouse Print* pointed out the deceptive nature of this advertisement, the company pulled the ad and said it was an error. Lowe’s tried to correct the ad merely by adding the words “up to” — saying “Up to 20% off major appliances $396 and up.” But, they kept the same disclaimer indicating that almost nothing was 20% off.

Lowe's revised ad

Our trusty mouse was infuriated. He filed a complaint with the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, which reviews problematic advertising usually at the behest of an aggrieved competitor.

Last week, the NAD rendered a decision in the case calling upon Lowe’s to discontinue their “up to 20% off” savings claims in future advertising unless a substantial amount of their inventory is at least 20% off, and any exceptions are clearly and conspicuously disclosed (unlike the inconspicuous disclosure used in the commercial).

Here is their press release announcing the decision and this is the full decision.

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Citi’s Credit Card Agreement Contains Another Nasty Ploy

In October, we told you about an unexpected move by Citi to let credit card customers opt-out of the mandatory arbitration clause in their credit card agreements. The catch: they required you to write an old-fashioned letter to them to do so. (See story.)

We heard from a reader, Daniel D., who says that is not the only dirty trick that Citi employs with respect to its arbitration clause. He said his bank account contract had a very similarly worded provision to this one in the new Citi credit card agreements:

*MOUSE PRINT:

Citi arbitration clause

What does this sound like to you? It sounds pretty positive as an additional way to avoid arbitration. It certainly gives the impression that the customer was free to go to small claims court system instead of being forced into arbitration.

And that is exactly what our reader did. He had a dispute with Citi over some late fees imposed despite his having overdraft protection. There was about $350 in dispute.

To his amazement, once he filed in small claims court, Citi requested the case be moved to a higher court. That action caused the case to no longer “stay in small claims court” and thus Citi could force him into arbitration.

What?

Anyone reading the small claims court provision would come away with the understanding that it was the plaintiff’s decision to keep a case in small claims court and definitely not Citi’s. Implied in every contract is a covenant of good faith, and it certainly seems to be a breach of that good faith for Citi to force this consumer into arbitration by a bit of legal trickery.

Daniel’s problem with Citi began in 2010 and appeared to end when he won the arbitration this past August. There were just two problems: (1) Daniel was not awarded anywhere near the $100,000 he said this whole fiasco cost him, and (2) Citi is appealing.

For more details of Daniel’s misadventures in Citiland, see this CBS MoneyWatch story, and his own account.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts below.

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Chipotle Sued Over Misleading Calorie Count

The embattled Mexican grill chain, Chipotle, is in trouble again.

In the course of promoting its new chorizo burrito which is made from chicken and pork sausage, the company touted on menu boards that it only had 300 calories.

Chipotle chorizo

Three diet-conscious California consumers took the bait and ordered this low-cal treat, but felt surprisingly full after eating one. They soon discovered they had been hoodwinked because this Mexican dish was nowhere near only 300 calories.

Mouse Print* reviewed the nutrition tables on Chipotle’s website and calculated the actual calorie count of a chorizo burrito.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Chipotle calories

As you can see, the chorizo burrito as described on the menu board has 1055 calories — more than three times the claimed amount. Just the tortilla wrapper alone is 300 calories, as is the chorizo alone.

This is likely to be an expensive mistake for Chipotle as the company is now being sued in a class action in California.

Informally, the company replied to some complaining customers on Twitter saying that the “300 calories is for the chorizo.”

Company spokesperson Chris Arnold, however, provided Fortune with this statement:

“As a matter of policy, we don’t discuss details surrounding pending legal action. I will note, however, that a lawsuit is nothing more than allegations and is proof of nothing. Generally speaking, we always work hard to maintain transparency around what is in our food, including the nutritional content, which is provided on an ingredient-by-ingredient basis.”

Share this story:

 

ADV