Zaimi v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 2026 WL 1145798, No.
2:25-cv-01076-JHC (W.D. Wash. Apr. 28, 2026)

The court refused to dismiss statutory and common-law claims
related to price differences between items that Costco sells online and
in-store: online, Costco charges more for big-ticket items like couches to
cover shipping, but advertises “free shipping.”  For example, one couch is available for
$2,099.99 when bought in a physical Costco store but costs $2,399.99 when
purchased online, and at checkout, “Shipping & Handling” is listed as
“$0.00.” Within the online listing, in light grey font, Costco says that
“Delivery, setup and packing removal [are] included,” and that “Items may be
available in your local warehouse, prices may vary.” Also, there’s a webpage
that says “Costco.com prices take into account shipping and handling fees not
applicable to warehouse purchases,” but plaintiff alleged that “she was not
presented with, and did not read, the fine print on Defendant’s customer
service webpage admitting that those representations were false.” She brought
claims under the Washington Consumer Protection Act (CPA) and California’s FAL,
UCL, and CLRA, along with claims for breach of contract, breach of
warranty, quasi-contract/unjust enrichment, and negligent and intentional
misrepresentation, which the court declined to dismiss. I won’t discuss many of
the details.

Costco argued that it disclosed the price differences and
shipping costs. Online, the listing states that “[d]elivery, setup, and
packaging removal included” in the stated price, and elsewhere on the website, it
discloses that items are cheaper if bought in-store. Thus, believing that one
would pay the same for the couch online as in the warehouse and pay nothing to
have it delivered was patently unreasonable.

Zaimi rejoined that the checkout page statement, “Shipping
& Handling $0.00,” induces reasonable consumers into believing they are
paying $0.00 for shipping, and that general disclaimers (that items are
available at a lower price in its warehouses) do not “negate the clear message
that ‘Shipping & Handling $0.00’ conveys to reasonable consumers.” The
court found no previous case to be entirely on point, but, at the motion to
dismiss stage, this theory was plausible. The online listing didn’t state that
the prices will be lower in-store: It states that the “prices may vary.” And
plaintiff plausibly alleged that consumers “expect free shipping,” given the
ubiquity of online shopping, even for large purchases like furniture.  

As for injury under Washington consumer protection law, it
was enough to allege that she “would not have made the online purchase if she
had known that she was paying for shipping or that Defendant charged more for
the product online.”

from Blogger https://tushnet.blogspot.com/2026/05/costcos-free-shipping-claims-plausibly.html