A new class action suit asserts fast casual restaurant chain Panera isn't being honest with its customers about pricing when ordering delivery through the app.
Lisa Ladonski, on behalf of herself and others, filed a new class action complaint in Chicago federal court on Feb. 22 against Panera LLC. The complaint alleges Panera engaged in deceptive advertising by hiding price increases associated with delivery orders from consumers, enticing them with a promotional $1 or free delivery when using their app.
The suit asserts Panera's misleading business practices amount to multiple violations of Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act.
Missouri-based Panera is the 10th largest restaurant franchise, operating more than 2,000 stores across the U.S. and Canada. Riding the surge in food service delivery following the Covid outbreak, Panera offered a low set delivery fee for its customers during the period of Covid-related lockdowns and social distancing.
Ms. Ladonski contends that Panera misled consumers with their online promotion that promised low set delivery fees when using the Panera app.
The hitch, she claims, is that Panera designed their app in such a way that when delivery is selected, it allegedly inflated the cost of food to compensate for the promotion, but hid this until the order was submitted. Consumers expecting a difference of only the nominal delivery fee allegedly were surprised at the new price, which allegedly amounted to a 5-10% increase when compared to an in-store pickup with no price differential.
In comparison, Chipotle and other franchises offering similar promotions, prominently displayed on their delivery ordering screen, “Higher menus prices and additional service fees apply for delivery," The complaint said.
Instead of full transparency, the suit alleges, Panera supposedly chose to hide the price differential, giving consumers an unrealistic understanding of the delivery terms.
Plaintiff is demanding a trial by jury, actual and punitive damages, court costs and legal fees.
Plaintiff is represented by attorneys Andrew J. Shamis and Edwin E. Elliott, of the law firm of Shamis & Gentile, of Miami; Scott Edelsberg, of Edelsberg Law, of Aventura, Florida; and Jeffrey D. Kaliel, of Kaliel Gold PLLC.