Last summer, a California consumer sued the big mattress chain, Mattress Firm, alleging the company inflated the so-called regular price of mattresses that it sold to give customers the sense that they were getting a better bargain than they really were. [We could not obtain a copy of the amended complaint filed last November.]

The consumer’s lawyer alleged that the company rarely if ever charges the stated crossed out price and therefore customers don’t save the amount of money the company claimed.

For example, this mattress was repeatedly advertised promising a savings of $1,200 because it was supposedly “60% off.”

As you can see, it was advertised month after month at the $799.99 price. When, if ever, was it $1999.99? The consumer’s lawyer contends:

*MOUSE PRINT:

… this reference price is a falsely inflated price because Defendant rarely, if ever, lists or sells items at the reference price. The only purpose of the reference price is to mislead customers into believing that the displayed reference price is a former or regular price at which Defendant usually lists and sells the item in the recent past. As a result, Defendant falsely conveys to customers that they are receiving a substantial markdown or discount.

In fact, Mattress Firm in its legal disclaimer, which is buried deep in its website, says that their strikethrough prices are not ones they have actually charged.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Compare at pricing is determined based on price of comparable merchandise of similar quality and circumstances. As a company, we stand behind our compare at prices, based on our market experience and knowledge. These prices reflect nationally competitive MSRP, list prices and do not reflect interim mark-downs, which may have been taken. We invite you to ask about any individual prices.

Since Mattress Firm’s strikethrough prices are unlabeled, shoppers might reasonably conclude that they are Mattress Firm’s own regular or former prices.

Under FTC rules, and the law of many states, including California, sellers have to offer goods at the undiscounted price for a reasonably substantial time in the recent regular course of business (often 90 days) before they subsequently discount them and compare the sale price to the reference price.

Why does the law require “regular” prices to be bonafide? Because consumers love a bargain and are greatly influenced by savings claims.

“By creating an impression of savings, the presence of a higher reference price enhances subjects’ perceived value and willingness to buy the product.” Thus, “empirical studies indicate that, as discount size increases, consumers’ perceptions of value and their willingness to buy the product increase…”

The consumer is suing Mattress Firm for fraud, misrepresentation, and unfair or deceptive business practices. She is seeking money damages and a court order enjoining the company from continuing these types of deceptive sales.

In late January, however, the plaintiff dismissed the case without explanation.

Mattress Firm is not the only bedding retailer being sued. Also in January 2025, two California consumers sued Sleep Number Corporation, making similar allegations. For example, the lawsuit says:

For example, anyone visiting Defendant’s store or Website on a given day who buys a Sleep Number i8 smart bed “on sale” for $2,999 based on a crossed-out reference price of $3,999 is being misled, because that bed has rarely, if ever, been sold in the recent past in Defendant’s stores, on the Website or through other retailers for $3,999. In other words, Defendant’s advertised “sales” for many of its beds are not really sales at all.

What is it about mattress sales that seem to bring out the worst in retailers’ making exaggerated savings claims?