A California consumer has filed a lawsuit against Lululemon (NASDAQ: LULU), accusing the athletic apparel brand of using fictitious reference prices to deceive shoppers into believing they are receiving discounts.
The plaintiff, Annette Cody, filed the lawsuit last month after purchasing a pair of Lululemon’s Wunder Train High-Rise Tight leggings in Steel Blue online for $59 in April.
The product listing displayed a strike-through reference price of $98, implying that Cody was receiving a $39 discount off the original retail price.
According to Courthouse News Service, the leggings had allegedly not been sold at the $98 price point since at least October 2025.
The lawsuit described Lululemon’s pricing practices as “patently deceptive,” arguing they are designed to mislead consumers into believing they are securing a bargain when they are not.
California’s False Advertising Law prohibits retailers from advertising a reference price that has not been the prevailing market price within the three months prior to the advertised sale.
Lululemon is not alone in facing this type of legal scrutiny, as a growing number of major retailers have recently been challenged over the credibility of their advertised online discounts.
Nike is currently facing a proposed class action lawsuit in California for similar alleged practices, with the complaint stating: “In reality, Nike’s reference prices are fictitious. Nike’s sales frequently last longer than 90 days. Because Nike products are ‘on sale’ for more than 90 days, the advertised reference prices are stale and do not reflect the prevailing market prices of those products.”
Chinese e-commerce giant Shein has also been targeted by a proposed class action in California, with plaintiffs accusing the company of misleading consumers through “illusory and misleading reference prices.”
Fashion retailer Hanna Anderson was similarly hit with a proposed class action earlier this year, accused of advertising “perpetual or near-perpetual discounts” of up to 60 percent off its products.
The wave of litigation reflects increasing consumer and legal scrutiny of discount pricing strategies employed by major apparel and e-commerce brands operating in the United States.
California’s consumer protection framework appears to be driving much of this legal activity, given the state’s stringent false advertising standards around reference pricing and promotional discounts.
