A Starbucks customer in Chicago has filed a lawsuit against the giant coffee chain, claiming that the coffee giant advertises its hot beverages by plastic fluid ounces, when in reality the accurate numbers are determined by adding ice. This was revealed in a suit which was recently filed against the company in the county court of Cook County, Illinois. The suit was filed by the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC), a government agency created under the Federal Trade Commission. According to the CPSC, Starbucks is guilty of fraud, deceit and false advertising, having advertised its hot beverages by these fluid ounces even though they were supposed to be served only by the iced teas. This is considered a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which regulates the actions of debt collectors and similar entities.

The suit was brought forth by the Starbucks customer Mark Varimbi, who lives in the southern part of Illinois. He purchased three packs of Starbucks iced teas from Starbucks on December 14th, 2021, just two days before Christmas. He was served the beverages as iced tea that morning, but upon leaving the restaurant, he realized that the beverages he bought were actually in fact iced coffee. Varimbi then contacted the Starbucks store regarding the discrepancies in the beverage descriptions and was shocked to find that the store has not made any attempt to rectify the situation despite his written complaint. On January 7th, Varimbi filed suit against Starbucks seeking damages for the injuries which resulted due to the store’s negligence.

On Friday, a judge at the US District Court in Chicago has proposed a class-action lawsuit which will be announced soon. Varimbi is one of the representatives of the Starbucks consumer members who have been involved in the case for the last three years. This was the first time that a judge has approved a proposed class-action lawsuit, according to lawyers involved with the case. This means that if one or more members of the Starbucks consumer members are awarded compensation, it could be the first of such instances.

According to Varimbi’s attorney, this decision was reached after a lengthy investigation of the claims put forward by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs had claimed that the drinks served by Starbucks contained an excessive amount of sugar and artificial sweeteners, which caused their drinks to contain a high degree of acidity. The acid content was believed to have been the cause of Mark Varimbi’s stroke in January, leading to additional complications. The judge has approved adding ice to Starbucks iced coffee drinks, but only after the company had offered a blanket discount to all customers who purchase six or more drinks at once. Varimbi is still hoping that the discount offered will boost sales of the drink to a level where it will be profitable.

Lawyers involved in the case feel that the damages awarded in the Starbucks iced coffee lawsuit will help the general public to avoid scenarios where they are required to drink concentrated acid drinks. Varimbi’s lawyer feels that for the general customer, this discount will help to ensure that the demand for drinks containing ice will not be affected. The impact of a court ruling on the price of a drink remains to be seen. He says that one way to determine whether or not the ruling will affect the cost of a cup of iced coffee is to determine the impact of such a ruling on the cost of serving hot teas. If the ruling did impact the cost of a latte or cappuccino, it is likely that a similar case will follow suit for other frozen drink products. However, for now, Starbucks remains confident that the damages awarded will be enough to deter other businesses from taking advantage of their client’s injuries.

The lawsuit is ongoing, and there is no indication when a final decision may be released. Varimbi’s lawyer expects that the outcome of the case will have a profound effect on the way that business is done in America. “The coffee business is a hugely competitive market,” he says, “so anything that can be done to limit competition is probably a good idea.”

By Ricky

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *