Amazon Pushes Customers To More Expensive Products, According To A Lawsuit

A proposed U.S. class action lawsuit was filed against Amazon.com, alleging that the online retailer misled hundreds of millions of customers towards more expensive products in order to collect additional fees.

Lower-priced options with faster delivery times are frequently hidden by Amazon’s algorithm for selecting what to display in its “Buy Box” when customers search for products, according to a complaint that was filed on Thursday in federal court in Seattle.

Referencing the recent antitrust lawsuit brought by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and 17 states against Amazon, the complaint claimed that consumers click Amazon’s “Buy Now” or “Add to Cart” buttons nearly 98% of the time, frequently under the mistaken impression that Amazon has discovered the greatest deals.

According to the lawsuit, Amazon developed the algorithm to help independent sellers who take part in its Fulfilment By Amazon programme and pay “hefty fees” for services like inventory storage, packaging and shipping, refunds, and other things.

“While ostensibly identifying the selection that consumers would make if they considered all the available offers, Amazon’s Buy Box algorithm deceptively favors Amazon’s own profits over consumer well-being,” the complaint said.

There were no comments from Amazon.

Robert Selway and Jeffrey Taylor, both residents of California, filed the case.

The plaintiffs’ attorney, Steve Berman, claims that Amazon violated a state statute in Washington against deceptive trade practices starting in 2016. As a result, a “great burden was placed upon its customers,” and as a result, damages are sought.

This action is distinct from other private litigation concerning the “Buy Box” in that it centres on the harm that misleading practices cause to customers rather than antitrust violations or injury to vendors who choose not to participate in Amazon’s fulfilment programme.

Taylor et al. v. Amazon.com Inc. is the case in question; it is No. 24-00169 in the Western District of Washington U.S. District Court.

(Adapted from ShareInvestor.com)

Leave a comment