Best Buy class action lawsuits have targeted the retailer over the last two decades on issues including the alleged sale of customer data to advertisers, false “was/now” discount pricing, defective Insignia pressure cookers, a refused price-match guarantee, hidden auto-renewing subscriptions, racial and gender discrimination in hiring, and unwanted robocalls to loyalty program members. Some cases have settled for millions of dollars and produced court-monitored reforms; others remain active in federal court.
2026 Privacy Suit Over Selling Customer Data
The most recent major filing is Moon v. Best Buy Co., Inc. (Case No. 0:26-cv-02381-JMB-DJF), a proposed class action filed April 27, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.1Top Class Actions. Best Buy Class Action Claims Retailer Secretly Sold Shoppers Personal Data to Advertisers Plaintiff Corlis Moon alleges Best Buy collects names, email and mailing addresses, phone numbers, and purchase histories at its stores and then sells that information to third-party advertisers through its retail media network, “Best Buy Ads,” without notice or consent.2ClassAction.org. Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Best Buy Sells Customer Info to Third Parties Without Consent
The complaint focuses on a “data clean room” operated by LiveRamp, which the suit says pseudonymizes Best Buy customer records and combines them with other data to build shopper profiles drawing on 15,000 unique attributes and tying 93 percent of transactional revenue to specific individuals.1Top Class Actions. Best Buy Class Action Claims Retailer Secretly Sold Shoppers Personal Data to Advertisers Moon calls this “privacy washing” and alleges violations of the Virginia Personal Information Privacy Act, seeking $100 in statutory damages per violation per class member along with injunctive relief, disgorgement, and attorneys’ fees.2ClassAction.org. Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Best Buy Sells Customer Info to Third Parties Without Consent The proposed class covers everyone in the United States whose personal information was shared through the arrangement. The case remains active.
False Discount Pricing Suits
Two pending suits accuse Best Buy of advertising phantom discounts. In Porchia v. Best Buy Co. Inc. (Case No. 4:25-cv-00134), filed January 2025 in the Northern District of California, four plaintiffs allege that since at least February 2023 the retailer has run “perpetual or near-perpetual” discounts from “Was” or “Reg” reference prices that don’t reflect actual regular prices.3Top Class Actions. Best Buy Class Action Alleges False Discount Advertising Scheme The suit covers televisions and appliances including refrigerators, ranges, dishwashers, and washers and dryers sold in stores and on bestbuy.com.4CaseFilingsAlert.com. Best Buy Accused of Fake Prices It alleges violations of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act, False Advertising Law, and Unfair Competition Law, and seeks restitution, disgorgement, and an injunction.
A related case, Morgan v. MN Best Buy Co., Inc., filed April 6, 2026, targets Best Buy’s three-part display of a sale price, a higher reference price, and a “Save $X.XX” figure. The complaint calls the reference prices “fictional” and “permanent,” singling out Best Buy’s house brand Insignia and arguing that reference prices controlled by Best Buy itself are “inherently nonsensical.” It says certain reference prices went unchanged for more than 14 months while transaction prices moved, in conflict with California’s rule that reference prices reflect the prevailing market price within the preceding 90 days.5ClassAction.org. Best Buy Lawsuit Claims Reference Prices Are Misleading, Illusory
Insignia Pressure Cooker Class Action
In October 2023, the Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled roughly 930,000 Insignia pressure cookers sold at Best Buy from October 2017 through June 2023, citing 31 incidents of hot contents being expelled and 17 burn injuries including severe second-degree burns. On January 5, 2024, Dean v. Best Buy Co., Inc. (Case No. 4:24-cv-00007) was filed in federal court in Georgia. The complaint alleges the inner pots carry incorrect volume markings that lead consumers to overfill, and that Best Buy misrepresented the cookers as safe and designed for “reliable and trouble-free performance.”6ClassAction.org. Best Buy Facing Class Action Following Recall of Defective Insignia Pressure Cookers The recall was expanded in March 2025 after further injury reports.7Lawsuit Information Center. Pressure Cooker Injury Lawsuits
Price Match Guarantee Suit
In Dima v. Best Buy Company, Inc. et al. (Case No. 7:23-cv-02869), filed in April 2023 in the Southern District of New York, plaintiff Vincent Dima calls Best Buy’s Price Match Guarantee a “bait-and-switch.”8ClassAction.org. Best Buy Price Match Guarantee Is a Bait and Switch Tactic, Class Action Alleges Dima says he first confirmed TigerDirect was an eligible competitor, then bought three Apple iPad Pros at $1,099 each with the intent of matching TigerDirect’s $555.99 listing. When he went to pick up the tablets at a Mount Vernon, New York store, Best Buy refused the match, and Dima alleges the company later removed TigerDirect from its competitor list.9Communications Daily. Class Action Calls Best Buys Price Match Guarantee a Bait and Switch Scheme The complaint invokes New York General Business Law Sections 349 and 350 and seeks injunctive relief for New York consumers denied the guarantee since April 2020.
Auto-Renewing Subscription Suit
Karim v. Best Buy Co., Inc. (Case No. 3:22-cv-04909), filed in 2022, alleges that Best Buy marketed Trend Micro internet security software as “FREE” during checkout without adequately disclosing that the service would convert into a paid recurring monthly subscription once the trial ended.10ClassAction.org. Best Buy Charges Customers for Unwanted Monthly Subscription Plans, Class Action Alleges It alleges violations of California’s Automatic Renewal Law and Consumers Legal Remedies Act. The case was still active in early 2026, with a proposed class of California consumers charged for auto-renewing subscriptions tied to Best Buy website purchases from July 2018 forward.
Holloway Discrimination Settlement
In December 2005, eight employees and one job applicant filed Holloway v. Best Buy Co. (Case No. 4:05-cv-05056) in the Northern District of California, alleging that Best Buy’s corporate culture favored white male workers in recruitment, hiring, promotions, job assignments, and hours, disadvantaging women, African American, and Latino employees.11Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. Holloway v. Best Buy Co.
The parties settled in June 2011 through a consent decree. Best Buy paid $200,000 to the nine named plaintiffs and up to roughly $10 million in attorneys’ fees and expenses.12NBC News. Best Buy Settles Job-Discrimination Lawsuit The company also agreed to four years of court-monitored reforms, including neutral hiring and promotion procedures, a complaint resolution process, and anti-discrimination policies posted on its internal website. In December 2015, a compliance monitor certified that Best Buy had met the decree’s requirements, and the case was closed.11Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. Holloway v. Best Buy Co.
Chesbro TCPA Robocall Settlement
In Chesbro v. Best Buy Co., Inc. (Case No. 2:10-cv-00774), filed in the Western District of Washington, plaintiff Michael Chesbro alleged that Best Buy placed automated calls to Reward Zone loyalty members without prior consent, in violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act and Washington’s Automatic Dialing and Announcing Act.13Law360. Best Buy Pays $4.5M to End TCPA Rewards Program Row Best Buy paid $4.5 million to settle. After expenses and legal fees, about $3.2 million was distributed among roughly 481,000 class members, or about $6.50 per person.
Odom MSN Free-Trial Settlement
Odom v. Microsoft Corp. and Best Buy (Case No. 04-2-10618-4 SEA) alleged that customers who bought laptops at Best Buy were enrolled in free-trial MSN dial-up internet accounts and then billed after the trial expired even if they never logged in. The plaintiffs brought claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, alleging wire fraud in the unauthorized transmission of financial information.14Redmond Magazine. Court Rejects Microsoft, Best Buy Appeal In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by Microsoft and Best Buy, letting the case proceed.
The case settled in Washington Superior Court for King County. Eligible class members who opened free-trial MSN accounts at Best Buy between December 1999 and June 2004 and never used them could receive a refund of all charges paid up to $75. Microsoft also agreed to suspend billing and forgive unpaid charges on any remaining open accounts. Class counsel requested $2,625,000 in fees, and each named plaintiff sought a $2,500 incentive award.15Class Law Group. Best Buy MSN Lawsuit
Related Regulatory Penalties
Class actions are not the only source of Best Buy’s legal exposure. A tracking database maintained by Good Jobs First records $22.4 million in regulatory penalties across 47 enforcement actions since 2000, covering employment, safety, consumer protection, and environmental categories.16Violation Tracker (Good Jobs First). Best Buy
In October 2016, Best Buy agreed to pay the Consumer Product Safety Commission a $3.8 million civil penalty for knowingly selling and distributing 16 types of recalled products between 2010 and 2015, including more than 400 Canon cameras among about 600 recalled items sold. The CPSC found the company had failed to properly quarantine recalled goods and had sometimes reactivated blocked product codes. Best Buy agreed to a compliance program and did not admit the charges.17U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Best Buy Agrees to Pay $3.8 Million Civil Penalty
In February 2021, the Riverside County District Attorney’s office, working with prosecutors from Alameda, Santa Barbara, and San Diego counties, secured a judgment against Best Buy in Riverside County Superior Court (Case No. CVRI2000477). The company was found to have misrepresented item prices, failed to accurately disclose return policy details, and violated a 2013 injunction requiring pricing-error signage at California checkout stands. Best Buy paid $558,570 in civil penalties and $75,000 in consumer restitution without admitting liability and was required to run a renewed pricing accuracy program.18Riverside County District Attorney. Best Buy Agrees to Pay More Than $600,000 in Consumer Protection Case