Bulova Class Action Lawsuit: Watch Brand Accused of Fake Sales

Case Overview: A class action lawsuit claims Bulova misled customers with deceptive pricing practices on its website, using inflated reference prices to create the illusion of significant discounts.

Consumers Affected: California consumers who purchased watches from Bulova's website at a discount based on a higher reference price since June 19, 2020.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Luxury watch brand Bulova is facing a class action lawsuit for allegedly misleading customers with deceptive pricing practices on its website. 

Plaintiff Moussa Faour, a resident of Los Angeles, claims that Bulova entices customers with what appear to be significant discounts based on inflated reference prices. According to the complaint, these crossed-out prices rarely, if ever, reflect the actual market value of the watches, leading customers to believe they are getting a substantial bargain.

Bulova Accused of Using Inflated Reference Prices to Deceive Customers

The lawsuit alleges that Bulova has created a false impression of luxury and discount by advertising “fake” sale prices. On its website, Bulova prominently displays a reference price, crossed out to show a supposedly discounted sale price. 

For instance, a watch might be listed with a regular price of $495, which is then crossed out to advertise a sale price of $396 with a “20% off sitewide” promotion. According to the complaint, these reference prices are inflated and do not represent the prices at which Bulova or other retailers commonly sell these watches.

Faour’s filing states that the crossed-out reference prices have not been the actual selling prices on Bulova’s website or through its retail partners. He claims that Bulova uses these inflated prices to mislead customers into thinking they are receiving a deal when, in reality, they are paying the regular market price.

Consumer Paid Premium Price Based on Misleading Discount

Faour purchased a Bulova Futuro watch (model number 98D144) in June 2024, paying a total of $433.62, including tax and shipping. The watch was listed with a reference price of $495, but Faour paid the discounted rate of $396. 

He says he relied on Bulova’s representation that he was purchasing a luxury watch at a significant discount. However, after making the purchase, Faour discovered that the reference price of $495 did not accurately reflect the prevailing market price of the watch.

According to the complaint, an investigation by Faour’s counsel found that, in the 90 days leading up to his purchase, the same Bulova Futuro watch was sold through other retailers—such as Jomashop, Walmart, Macy’s, Kohl’s, and Amazon—for prices ranging from $237 to $420.75. 

Faour’s claim asserts that the listed reference price on Bulova’s website was significantly higher than the watch’s actual market value. This difference, he argues, misled him and other customers into believing they were getting a larger discount than they actually were.

Bulova's Pricing Practices Misrepresent Brand's Prestige

Faour’s lawsuit claims that Bulova’s use of inflated reference prices is not limited to its own website but extends to its retail partners as well. The complaint alleges that these partners also display Bulova’s products with similar reference prices, creating the impression that these watches are sold at a higher price point than is accurate.

Furthermore, the lawsuit argues that these deceptive practices are intended to reinforce Bulova’s image as a luxury brand, luring customers to buy watches based on perceived exclusivity and discount. 

By advertising these watches as being offered at a significant markdown from the original price, Bulova allegedly misrepresents the true value of its products and inflates customers’ perceptions of the brand’s prestige.

Other Retailers Face Similar Lawsuits Over Deceptive Pricing

This case is part of a broader trend of legal actions against retailers accused of misleading pricing strategies. In recent months, several companies have faced similar lawsuits:

• Amazon: In September 2024, Amazon was sued for allegedly using false and misleading sales prices to promote its Fire TVs. The lawsuit claimed that Amazon advertised inflated list prices with strikethroughs to create a false impression of discounts.
  
  
• Temu: In August 2024, online retailer Temu faced a lawsuit accusing it of advertising fake markdowns. The complaint alleged that Temu listed merchandise with purportedly discounted prices alongside higher, fabricated reference prices, misleading consumers about the actual value of the products.
  
  
• Home Depot: In October 2024, Home Depot was sued for false advertising, with claims that the retailer listed inflated original prices on its website to make discounts appear more substantial than they were. 

Faour’s lawsuit seeks to represent all California consumers who, since June 19, 2020, purchased watches from Bulova’s website at a discount based on a higher reference price. He is seeking compensation for affected consumers, alleging that they paid more than they otherwise would have if Bulova had accurately advertised its prices.

In addition to financial restitution, the lawsuit seeks to put a stop to Bulova’s alleged use of inflated reference prices. Faour and his legal team argue that the company’s practices violate consumer protection laws and constitute false advertising. They are asking for the court to mandate a change in Bulova’s pricing practices, requiring transparency about actual market prices to prevent further consumer deception.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Moussa Faour v. Bulova Watch Company, Inc.
• Case Number: 2:24-cv-09532
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Matthew Wolf (Turner Henningsen Wolf & Vandenburg, LLP)

Have you purchased a Bulova watch from their website? Share your experience with their pricing practices in the comments below.