Hartford Ct. Superior Court Judge Marshall K. Berger, Jr. has approved a settlement between Best Buy and Conn Attorney General Richard Blumenthal that requires the Minnesota based company to immediately pay Conn $399,000 and provide restitution to customers who were cheated by its Internet scam over a six year period from 2001 to 2007.
Blumenthal in 2007 sued Best Buy based on allegation I disclosed in my Watchdog column at The Courant that the largest electronics retailer in the country was deceiving customers by using a secret in-store computer network that was identical to the public one but had different prices.
Best Buy officials did not respond to a request for a comment. It could not be determined immediately how many, if any, other states have also sued Best Buy over the same issue.
Being able to collect restitution may not be easy. The settlement (printed in full at the bottom) – which avoided a trial scheduled to start today – requires the following:
6.2.1 Eligible Consumers shall mean all Consumers who:
(i) At any time between November 1, 2001, and March 8, 2007, purchased a product at a Connecticut Store at a price that was higher than the price the Consumer observed on BestBuy.com; and
(ii) Prior to making such purchase, utilized the Kiosk Website to view the product and price,
6.2.2 To qualify for restitution, Eligible Consumers must submit to the State a completed Claim Form within thirty (30) days after the last day that the notice is posted in the Defendants’ stores, as set forth in Paragraph 6.2. The State may extend the deadline for submissions of restitution claims on a case-by-case basis for good cause with the consent of the Defendants, which consent shall not be unreasonably refused.
6.2.3 The State will forward to the Defendants via the email address listed in Paragraph 9.2 of the Stipulated Judgment each Claim Form received from Eligible Consumers.
6.2.4 Restitution shall be in the amount of the difference in price between the
Kiosk Website and BestBuy.com on the date of the transaction.
6.2.5 The Defendants will have thirty (30) days from the date each Claim Form is sent to the Defendants within which to provide proof that the Eligible Consumer’s claim for restitution should be denied in whole or in part.
6.2,6 If the Defendants provide such proof to the State, the State will review the Claim Form and the Defendants’ response and make a determination, for claims that do not exceed One Hundred dollars ($100.00), in its sole and
final discretion, as to the amount of Restitution the Defendants must provide to the Eligible Consumer.
6.2.7 For claims that exceed $100, if the parties cannot agree on whether restitution is warranted, then the parties shall move for the Court to decide appropriate restitution relief.
6.2.8 All payments required of the Defendants to Eligible Consumers shall be made within forty-five (45) days of either:
(D the State’s determination made under Paragraph 6.2.6 that restitution is
warranted; (ii) the date on which the Defendants were required to, but did
not, provide proof that the Eligible Consumer’s claim for restitution
should be denied in whole or in part; or (iii) the date of this Court’s
determination, made under Paragraph 6.2.7, that restitution is warranted.
6.2.9 Defendants shall pay restitution in the form of cash or check.
6.3 No later than two hundred and fifty (250) days after the last day on which
restitution claims are received, as provided in Paragraph 6.2,2, the Defendants shall provide the State evidence of payment of all claims to Eligible Consumers,
When Blumenthal launched his suit in March 2007 he and state Consumer Protection Commissioner Jerry Farrell Jr. said they expected it would result in millions of dollars in penalties and refunds. It is doubtful, however, that the settlement against the Minnesota based chain is that high. It is believed that the settlement only involves Connecticut while the Internet scam was used throughout the country.
At the time Farrell said he and Blumenthal offered to settle the case for several million dollars, but Best Buy, insisting it did not do anything to warrant such punishment, refused the offer.
The suit was filed after a Feb. 9, 2007 Watchdog column disclosed that Best Buy stores had a secret intranet site in its stores — one that mirrored the public BestBuy.com Internet site, but with different pricing. The intranet prices usually reflected the individual store’s prices, not the public Internet prices, which Best Buy since 2005 has promised to honor.
An East Hartford teacher, Eric Hammer of Torrington, tipped me off about the possibility of the dual Internet sites after his experiences at Best Buy stores.
Hundreds of Best Buy customers later complained to me about being charged higher-than-advertised prices on the public Internet site.
They said they looked up sales on bestbuy.com, but when they went into stores, clerks would show them a bestbuy.com site that had a price other than the sales price. Customers were told that the sale apparently was over, or that they had misread the advertisement.
In reality, the salesman was accessing an intranet website that was almost identical to the public site. According to current and former employees and managers, some workers knew they were misleading customers, while other employees were unaware of the duplicate site.
Best Buy officials have denied that the in-store intranet site was devised to confuse employees or customers. At the time they said the intranet site was set up only to let people know what was available in the stores, not to deceive customers. Only a small percentage of customers were adversely affected, they said.
“Once this issue was brought to our attention, we provided immediate training for our employees to help ensure that all customers received the best price. We are in the process of making changes to eliminate future confusion” company spokeswoman Susan Busch said in a prepared release then.
“Further details about this matter must be saved for courtroom; however, I can tell you that we intend to vigorously defend ourselves. The future of our company depends on our ability to build trusted relationships with our customers. Our goal is to provide our customers with the products and services that best meet their individual needs.”
Blumenthal said at the time that he did not buy the company’s explanation and that he expects other states to file their own lawsuits against Best Buy or join his suit.
“Best Buy gave consumers the worst deal: a bait-and-switch-plus scheme luring consumers into stores with promised online discounts, only to charge higher in-store prices,” he said. “Best Buy treated its customers like suckers, not patrons to be prized.”
Farrell added, “It is extremely unfortunate that this company misled consumers as to what the `best buy’ actually was.”
STIPULATED JUDGMENT
This action, by writ and complaint, came to this Court on May 31, 2007, and thence to the present time when the Parties to this action (the “Parties”) appeared and filed a written Stipulation, filed herewith, that judgment be entered as hereinafter set forth.
The Parties to this action and Stipulated Judgment are Plaintiff, State of Connecticut, by and through its Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal, acting on behalf and at the behest of Jerry Farrell, Jr., Commissioner of Consumer Protection, and defendants Best Buy Company, Inc., BestBuy.com, LLC and Best Buy Stores, Limited Partnership (collectively, the “Defendants”). As evidenced by their signatures below and on the accompanying Stipulation, the Parties consent to the entry of this Stipulated Judgment and its provisions without trial.
This is a Stipulated Judgment for which execution may issue. The Parties consent to
entry of this Stipulated Judgment without further notice.
By signature of their respective counsel below, and except as otherwise set forth herein, Defendants waive any right to appeal, petition for certiorari or writ of error, or move to reargue or otherwise be heard on any challenge, in connection with any judicial proceeding upon this Stipulated Judgment in the form originally signed and submitted to the Court by the Parties. Each of the Parties retains any right afforded by law to notice of, and to oppose, brief, and be heard on, any motion or other proceeding for modification, enforcement, or execution of this Stipulated Judgment, and the right to appeal any subsequent order of any court relating to this Stipulated Judgment.
This Stipulated Judgment shall bind the Defendants and shall be binding on any and all further purchasers, merged parties, inheritors, or other successors in interest of Defendants.
Now, therefore, before any testimony has been taken, without trial or adjudication on any issue of fact or law, and without any admission by the Defendants of any wrongdoing, and without the entry of this Stipulated Judgment constituting evidence of, or admission by the Defendant of, any wrongdoing,
IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND ADJUDICATED AS FOLLOWS:
1. JURISDICTION
The Court has jurisdiction over the Subject Matter of this action and of the Parties hereto, pursuant to the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act and, more particularly, General Statutes §
42-110m. Jurisdiction is retained by this Court for the purpose of enabling the Parties to this Stipulated Judgment to apply to this Court at any time upon proper notice to the adverse party for such further orders and directions as may be necessary or appropriate for the construction, modification, enforcement, execution, or satisfaction of this Stipulated Judgment.
2. DEFINITIONS
2.1 “Action” shall mean the within civil action, captioned State of Connecticut v. Best
Buy Co., Inc., et a!, X07-CV-07-4030564-S, and more particularly the Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, dated April 14, 2010.
2.2 “Attorney General” shall refer to Richard Blumenthal, the Attorney General of the
State of Connecticut and/or the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Connecticut.
2.3 “BestBuy.com” shall refer to the internet website accessible on the World Wide
Web with the domain name “www.BestBuy.com.”
2.4 “Clear and Conspicuous” or “Clearly and Conspicuously” shall refer to a
statement that, regardless of the medium in which it is made, is readily understandable and presented in such size, color, contrast, duration, location and audibility, compared to the other information with which it is presented, that it is
readily apparent to the person to whom it is disclosed. A Clear and Conspicuous statement may not contradict or be inconsistent with any other information with which it is presented. If a statement modifies, explains, or clarifies other information with which it is presented, it must be presented in close proximity to the information it modifies, in a manner that is readily apparent and understandable.
2.5 “Commissioner” or “Commissioner of Consumer Protection” shall mean the Commissioner of Consumer Protection for the State of Connecticut or his authorized representative(s). Where any provision herein requires or authorizes the Commissioner to take any action, that act may be undertaken by the Commissioner’s authorized representative(s), unless otherwise prohibited by law.
2.6 “Connecticut Stores” shall mean retail stores operated by the Defendants in the
State of Connecticut.
2.7 “Consumer” shall mean any person, a natural person, individual, governmental
agency or entity, partnership, corporation, company, limited liability company or corporation, trust, estate, incorporated or unincorporated association, or any other legal or commercial entity, however organized.
2.8 “CUTPA” shall refer to the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, General
Statutes §§ 42-110a et seq.
2.9 “Defendants” shall mean Best Buy Co., Inc., BestBuy.com, LLC and Best Buy
Stores Limited Partnership and each of their respective directors, officers, agents, assigns, employees and all other persons or entities acting on their behalf, and their predecessors, subsidiaries, affiliates and successors acting in the State of
Connecticut, in the United States of America. Any reference herein to the “Defendants” shall be interpreted as meaning “each and every Defendant.”
2.10 “Eligible Consumer” shall mean any consumer who meets the requirements for restitution eligibility, as set forth in this Stipulated Judgment.
2.11 “Kiosk” shall mean consumer-facing interactive computer terminals located in the Defendants’ Connecticut stores that display information, including information relating to Defendants’ products and services.
2.12 “Kiosk Website” shall mean the website with the address “kiosk.bestbuy.com”
that appears and operates on the Kiosks. The Kiosk Website may present a modified version of BestBuy.com. Such modifications may include, for example, notification banners, different time-out settings, altered customer-information
collection protocols, displaying a lower in-store price than is available on BestBuy.com, and so on.
2.13 “Plaintiff,” “Connecticut,” “State of Connecticut,” or the “State” shall refer to the State of Connecticut.
2.14 “Represent” shall mean to state or imply through claims, statements, questions, conduct, graphics, symbols, lettering, formats, devices, language, documents, messages, or any other manner or means by which meaning might be conveyed. This definition applies to other forms of the word “Represent,” including, without limitation, “Representation,” “Misrepresent,” and “Misrepresentation.”
2.15 “Stipulated Judgment” shall refer to this document, together with all appendices
and attachments hereto, entitled Stipulated Judgment, in this Action.
2.16 “Subject Matter” shall mean all claims that may have been brought by the State for alleged Representations relating to the Action.
3. PROHIBITIVE INJUNCTION
Pursuant to General Statutes § 42-110m(a), the Defendants, whether acting directly or indirectly, shall be permanently enjoined from engaging in any of the following acts or practices in the State of Connecticut:
3.1 The Defendants, whether acting directly or indirectly, shall be enjoined from
displaying a higher price for the products on the Kiosk Website than the prices displayed for those same products on BestBuy.com.
4. AFFIRMATIVE INJUNCTIONS
Pursuant to General Statutes § 42-110m(a), the Defendants, whether acting directly or indirectly, shall engage in the following acts or practices in the State of Connecticut:
4.1 To the extent that the Kiosk Website displays a price that could differ from
BestBuy.com, the Defendants shall Clearly and Conspicuously disclose to Consumers that prices displayed on the Kiosk Website may differ from BestBuy.com prices.
4,2 To the extent that the prices displayed on the Kiosk Website may differ from
BestBuy.com, Defendants shall Clearly and Conspicuously disclose to Consumers an accurate description of what price the Kiosk displays (e.g., whether the Kiosk Website -displays the internet BestBuy,com price, the lowest of either the local in-store price or the BestBuy.com price, and so on).
5. PAYMENT TO THE STATE
5.1 The Defendants shall pay the sum total of Three Hundred and Ninety-Nine
Thousand Dollars ($399,000.00) to the State of Connecticut which shall be deposited into the General Fund. Payment shall be made payable to the “Treasurer, State of Connecticut,” and shall be mailed to the attention of State of Connecticut, Phillip Rosario, Assistant Attorney General, 110 Sherman Street, Hartford, Connecticut. Prior to the entry of the Stipulated Judgment, the State shall provide to the Defendants a completed IRS form W-9 with its federal tax identification number. The Defendants shall make payment within ten (10) days of either the date it receives a completed form W-9 or entry of the Stipulated Judgment, whichever date is later.
6. RESTITUTION
6.1 No later than forty-five (45) days after entry of the Stipulated Judgment,
Defendants will post the Notice attached as Appendix A hereto in each Connecticut Store. The Notice shall be posted in each Connecticut Store on a stand-alone placard in front of the loss mitigation desk in the front of the store. The Defendants will also have available in each Connecticut Store copies of the
Notice and Claim Form, a copy of which is attached hereto as Appendix B, which will be provided to any person who requests the same.
6.2 The notice provided for in Section 6.1 above shall be posted for a period of not
less than sixty (60) days. The Defendants will provide restitution due to all Eligible Consumers under the procedures set forth below.
6.2.1 Eligible Consumers shall mean all Consumers who:
(i) At any time between November 1, 2001, and March 8, 2007, purchased a product at a Connecticut Store at a price that was higher than the price the Consumer observed on BestBuy.com; and
(ii) Prior to making such purchase, utilized the Kiosk Website to view the product and price,
6.2.2 To qualify for restitution, Eligible Consumers must submit to the State a completed Claim Form within thirty (30) days after the last day that the notice is posted in the Defendants’ stores, as set forth in Paragraph 6.2. The State may extend the deadline for submissions of restitution claims on a case-by-case basis for good cause with the consent of the Defendants, which consent shall not be unreasonably refused.
6.2.3 The State will forward to the Defendants via the email address listed in Paragraph 9.2 of the Stipulated Judgment each Claim Form received from Eligible Consumers.
6.2.4 Restitution shall be in the amount of the difference in price between the
Kiosk Website and BestBuy.com on the date of the transaction.
6.2.5 The Defendants will have thirty (30) days from the date each Claim Form is sent to the Defendants within which to provide proof that the Eligible Consumer’s claim for restitution should be denied in whole or in part.
6.2,6 If the Defendants provide such proof to the State, the State will review the Claim Form and the Defendants’ response and make a determination, for claims that do not exceed One Hundred dollars ($100.00), in its sole and
final discretion, as to the amount of Restitution the Defendants must provide to the Eligible Consumer.
6.2.7 For claims that exceed $100, if the parties cannot agree on whether restitution is warranted, then the parties shall move for the Court to decide appropriate restitution relief.
6.2.8 All payments required of the Defendants to Eligible Consumers shall be made within forty-five (45) days of either:
(D the State’s determination made under Paragraph 6.2.6 that restitution is
warranted; (ii) the date on which the Defendants were required to, but did
not, provide proof that the Eligible Consumer’s claim for restitution
should be denied in whole or in part; or (iii) the date of this Court’s
determination, made under Paragraph 6.2.7, that restitution is warranted.
6.2.9 Defendants shall pay restitution in the form of cash or check.
6.3 No later than two hundred and fifty (250) days after the last day on which
restitution claims are received, as provided in Paragraph 6.2,2, the Defendants shall provide the State evidence of payment of all claims to Eligible Consumers,
7. VIOLATION AND CURE
7.1 Upon making the payments specified in Sections 5 and 6, Defendants shall be
fully divested of any interest in, or ownership of, any monies paid and any interest in the monies, and the monies and any subsequent interest or income derived therefrom shall inure entirely and solely to the benefit of the State or Eligible Consumers, as the case may be, pursuant to the terms of this Stipulated Judgment.
7.2 Any violation of the terms set forth in Sections 3, 4, 5, or 6 shall require the State
to provide written notice specifying the alleged conduct underlying the violation. The Defendants shall have thirty (30) days from the date of the State’s notice to
remedy the alleged violation. The parties will then meet and confer regarding whether the alleged violation was cured, This meet-and-confer process will continue, if necessary, for another thirty (30) days. If after that second 30-day period, the parties have not resolved the alleged violation, the State may move the Court to impose sanctions, and/or may seek any other relief or remedy afforded by law or equity. During the cure period set forth in this Paragraph, The parties shall not file any actions in the Court relating to the alleged violations.
7.3 If the alleged violation relates to any provision of Section 6 of this Stipulated
Judgment, then all deadlines in that section shall be tolled until the cure period set forth in Paragraph 7.2 expires, Irrespective of the remedy or relief elected or pursued by the State, nothing herein shall be deemed to waive, diminish, or otherwise avoid the Defendants’ monetary obligations set forth in Section 5.
8. RELEASE
8.1 In consideration of, and contingent upon the Defendants’ full and continuing
compliance with all obligations set forth in this Stipulated Judgment, and except as otherwise set forth herein, the State will not pursue any further action under CUTPA against the Defendants for the acts and practices that comprise the Subject Matter of the Action.
9. GENERAL PROVISIONS
9.1 Nothing in this Stipulated Judgment shall be construed as relieving the
Defendants of their obligations to comply with all state and federal laws, regulations, and rules, or as granting permission to engage in any acts or practices prohibited by such law, regulation, or rule.
9.2 Any notices required to be sent to the State or to the Defendants by this Stipulated
Judgment shall be sent by United States mail or certified mail return receipt
requested. The documents shall be sent to the following addresses:
For the State:
Jonathan J. Blake
Phillip Rosario
Assistant Attorneys General
Office of the Attorney General
110 Sherman Street Hartford, Connecticut 06105
Tel: (860) 808-5400 Fax: (860) 808-5593 Jonathan.Blake@ct.gov Phillip.rosario@ct.gov
For the Defendants:
Elliot S. Kaplan, Esq.
Anne M. Lockner, Esq.
Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. 2800 LaSalle Plaza
800 LaSalle Ave.
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Tel: (612) 349-8500 Fax: (612) 339-4181 eskaplan@rlonc.com amlockner@rkmc.com
—and—
Robert M. Langer, Esq. Wiggin and Dana LLP One CityPlace, 34th Floor 185 Asylum Street
Hartford, Connecticut 06103
Tel: (860) 297-3724 Fax: (860) 525-9380 rlanger@wiggin.com
9.3 Titles or captions in this Stipulated Judgment are inserted as a matter of
convenience and for reference only and in no way define, limit, extend, or describe the scope of this Stipulated Judgment or any provision thereof.
9.4 The Parties have negotiated, jointly drafted, and fully reviewed the terms of this
Stipulated Judgment, and therefore the rule that uncertainty or ambiguity is to be construed against the drafter shall not apply to the construction or interpretation of this Stipulated Judgment.
9.5 If any portion of this Stipulated Judgment is held invalid by operation of law, the
remaining terms of this Stipulated Judgment shall not be affected,
9.6 The Defendants enter into this Stipulated Judgment of their own free and
voluntary act and with full knowledge and understanding of the nature of the proceedings and the obligations and duties imposed by this Stipulated Judgment.
9.7 Any failure by the State to insist upon the strict performance by any Defendant of any of the provisions of this Stipulated Judgment shall not be deemed a waiver of any of the provisions of this Stipulated Judgment, and the State, notwithstanding such failure, shall have the right thereafter to insist upon the specific performance of any and all of the provisions of this Stipulated Judgment and the imposition of any penalties provided for by the laws of the State of Connecticut, subject to the notice and cure procedure set forth in Section 7 herein.
9.8 Nothing in this Stipulated Judgment shall be interpreted to affect any private
claim, right, debt, or cause of action that any Consumer may have against any Defendant based on the acts and practices of Defendants.
9.9 Any signature required to effect any part of this Stipulated Judgment, including
the Stipulation filed herewith, may be executed by the Parties in counterparts, each of which signatures shall be deemed an original, and any such document executed in counterparts shall have the same effect and authority.
9.10 This Stipulated Judgment shall be binding on Defendants and their future
purchasers, merged parties, inheritors, or other successors in interest and Defendants shall take no direct or indirect action to circumvent the terms of this
Stipulated Judgment. In no event shall assignment of any right, power, or authority under this Stipulated Judgment avoid Defendants’ compliance with this Stipulated Judgment
9.11 This Stipulated Judgment sets forth the entire agreement between the Parties, and there are no representations, arrangements, or understandings, oral or written, between the Parties relating to the subject matter of this Stipulated Judgment that are not fully expressed herein or attached hereto.
9.12 As used herein, the plural shall refer to the singular and the singular shall refer to the plural, and the masculine and the feminine and the neuter shall refer to the other, as the context requires.
9.13 The exhibits, appendices and attachments to this Stipulated Judgment are and shall be considered part of the Order.
9.14 Except as otherwise set forth herein, this Stipulated Judgment is not intended by the Parties to amend or supersede any existing or future contract or agreement between the Defendants and any Consumer. Except as otherwise set forth herein,
it is not the intention of the parties to establish or create a third-party beneficiary interest on behalf of any Consumer that does not otherwise exist at law.
9.15 This Stipulated Judgment shall not be deemed as having any res judicata,
collateral estoppel or issue preclusion effect on any future actions, matters, allegations, complaints, prosecutions, liabilities, issues, delinquencies, taxes arising from Defendants’ collective individual conduct—whether known or unknown; whether civil, criminal, administrative or regulatory; whether inuring to the State or any of its agencies, to any Consumers, to any putative class plaintiffs, third party beneficiaries, or any other person or entity. Provided, however, that the Defendants’ collective, full and complete performance and satisfaction of all terms herein shall be deemed by the State to resolve solely the specific violations
of CUTPA alleged by the Attorney General on behalf of the State in these proceedings.
THE PARTIES DO HEREBY CONSENT:
PLAINTIFF:
For the State of Connecticut:
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL ATTORNEY GENERAL
r ,
Jonath
Assista Attorney General Attorney General’s Office
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
110 Sherman Street Hartford, CT 06105 Juris No. 426816
It is so ordered,
Berger, J
DEFENDANTS:
For Best Buy Co., Inc., BestBuy.com, LLC, Best Buy Stores, Limited Partnership
Robert M. Langer
WIGGIN AND DANA, LLP One City Place
185 Asylum Street
Hartford, CT 06103-3402 Telephone: 860-297-3700 Facsimile: 860-525-9380
kris No.: 67700
APPENDIX A
NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT OF IN-STORE KIOSK LITIGATION – [DATE]
Best Buy recently entered into a Stipulated Judgment with the State of Connecticut in a civil action entitled State of Connecticut v. Best Buy Co., Inc., et al, X07-CV-07-4030564-S. The State had alleged in its complaint that Best Buy’s display of store prices, rather than internet prices, on its in-store kiosks was deceptive and violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act. Best Buy denied such allegations, and made no admission thereto. On [DATE], Best Buy and the State agreed to the entry of a Stipulated Judgment resolving the State’s Complaint.
In accordance with the Judgment, you may be eligible for restitution if:
1. At any time between November 1, 2001, and March 8, 2007, you purchased a product at a Connecticut Best Buy at a price that was higher than the price you observed on the BestBuy.com website; and
2. Prior to making such purchase, you utilized an in-store Kiosk to view the product and price.
To qualify for restitution, you must submit a statement containing the following: (1) your name and address, (2) the date on which purchased a product at Best Buy, (3) the price you paid for the product, and (4) the price you observed for the product on the in-store Kiosk. Please forward your statement, together with copies of any invoices, receipts, computer print-outs or other supporting documentation you may have, to the following:
Best Buy Restitution Claims
do Stephen Hennessey, Lead Investigator
Connecticut Office of the Attorney General
110 Sherman Street
Hartford, CT 06105
(860) 808-5400
Stephen.hennessey@ct.gov
A copy of this Notice and a form statement are available, upon request, at the Best Buy customer service counter located inside this store and from the Office of the Attorney General at [website] or by contacting the Office of the Attorney General at the address, telephone number or email address listed above. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of the Attorney General. All claims must be submitted no later than [DATE] to be considered for eligibility.
APPENDIX B
CLAIM FORM
SETTLEMENT OF IN-STORE KIOSK LITIGATION
Best Buy recently entered into a Stipulated Judgment with the State of Connecticut in a civil action entitled State of Connecticut v. Best Buy Co., Inc., et al, X07-CV-07-4030564-S. The State had alleged in its complaint that Best Buy’s display of store prices, rather than internet prices, on its in-store kiosks was deceptive and violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act. Best Buy denied such allegations, and made no admission thereto. On [DATE], Best Buy and the State agreed to the entry of a Stipulated Judgment resolving the State’s Complaint.
Dear Consumer. Please review this form BEFORE filling it out. PLEASE FILL OUT THE FORM COMPLETELY, SIGN, AND return postmarked by . If you are filing a claim for more than one eligible purchase, you will need to fill out a separate claim form for each purchase. Feel free to make copies of this form or, if necessary, contact the Attorney General at 860-808-5400 or visit www.ct.goy/ag for additional forms.
Please return this claim form with any additional pages, if necessary, and copies (no originals, please) of documents you feel help explain or substantiate your claim. Be sure to include a dollar amount in the “Amount you claim you are owed” even if that amount is your best estimate. Please do your best to provide complete information. If you cannot provide all of the information we are requesting, we may need to obtain additional information from you, which could delay consideration of your claim.
NOTE: IT IS IMPORTANT TO FILL OUT BOTH SIDES OF THIS FORM AND TO MAKE A COPY OF BOTH SIDES FOR YOUR RECORDS.
I. At any time between November 1, 2001, and March 8, 2007, did you purchase a product at a Connecticut Best
Buy Store at a price that was higher than the price that you observed on the BestBuy.com internet website:
Yes No
1 Prior to making such purchase, did you use a Kiosk in the Connecticut Best Buy Store to view the product and price: Yes 1-1 No
3. What is the date of your purchase:
4. In what Connecticut Best Buy store did you make the purchase:
5. What specific product did you purchase:
6. How did you purchase the products, i.e., cash, credit card, etc.?
7. What is the Total Amount you paid:
8. Have you been or are you currently a party to any legal actionagainst Best Buy Company, Inc., BestBuy.com, LLC and Best Buy Stores, Limited Partnership? Yes 0 No LI
9, Have you received a refund, account credit, gift card, replacement or other payment from Best Buy Company, Inc., BestBuy.com, LLC and Best Buy Stores, Limited Partnership, from your credit card company, or from any other source related to the product you have identified on this claim form? Yes No
10.If you answered “YES” to either question 8 or 9, please explain and identify any amounts you were refunded:
11. Total amount you claim you are still owed: (total all dollar amounts you have provided above, subtract
any refunds, credits or other payment entered above)
12, Please provide a brief explanation of your claim below and how you determined the monetary amount you are claiming. Please be aware that your claimed amount may be subject to verification and you may be asked for additional information if necessary to clarify your claim.
-,:
AINIAN l iN110101 ‘WON
,— L
please I nn I or 1 yin
Name
Last Firs( Middle Initial
Address:
City: State Zip
Day Phone: ( ) Evening/Cell Phone ( ) E-mail address:
I understand that my claim and the related documents will become a “public record” and under state law can be
subject to a public records disclosure request and thus be seen by other people.
Signed under penalty of false statement in accordance with General Statutes 4 53a-157b.,
Signature Date City and State where signed
/ /
Please return completed Claim Form to:
Best Buy Restitution Claims
c/o Stephen Hennessey, Lead Investigator
Connecticut Office of the Attorney General
110 Sherman Street
Hartford, CT 06105
(860) 808-5400
Stephen.hennessey@ct.gov
This form must be returned post-marked no later than
Go to http://www.ct.gov/ag to find
I loved your story on Best Buy. Do you have a counterpart in Oregon?