Blog

Otter Products, LLC (“OtterBox”), a leading manufacturer of phone and tablet cases, is facing legal action over its warranty policies. OtterBox, known for producing waterproof and impact-resistant cases, advertises a “Limited Lifetime Warranty” covering defects in material and workmanship under normal use. However, a recently filed class action lawsuit alleges that OtterBox systematically fails to honor valid warranty claims on Smartphone Cases and Tablet Cases, leaving consumers without promised replacements or repairs.  

The lawsuit, filed by Singleton Schreiber on behalf of nine plaintiffs, accuses OtterBox of failing to honor its warranty agreement and violating multiple consumer protection laws.

Understanding the Allegations

According to the lawsuit, OtterBox marketed its Smartphone Cases and Tablet Cases as offering reliable protection and assured consumers that defects in materials or workmanship would be covered under its “Limited Lifetime Warranty.” However, plaintiffs claim that the company systematically fails to honor valid warranty claims on Smartphone Cases and Tablet Cases, leaving customers without the promised replacements or repairs.

As a result, the plaintiffs have filed a class-action lawsuit against OtterBox for the following legal violations:  

• Violations of warranty statutes – Federal and state laws protect consumers from companies that fail to honor written warranties. The lawsuit alleges that OtterBox’s refusal to replace or repair defective cases constitutes a violation of these laws.
• State consumer protection statutes – Many states have laws prohibiting deceptive business practices. Plaintiffs argue that OtterBox violated these laws when it misled consumers by marketing a warranty that it allegedly failed to uphold.
• Consumer fraud – This claim asserts that OtterBox knowingly deceived customers by offering a warranty it did not intend to honor, leading consumers to purchase products under false pretenses.
• Breach of warranty – A company that provides a written warranty is legally obligated to fulfill it. Plaintiffs contend that OtterBox failed to honor its own warranty terms, violating express warranty laws.
• Common law fraud – This claim suggests that OtterBox deliberately misrepresented its warranty policy, leading consumers to believe they had coverage when they did not. Fraud claims typically require proof that the company knew its statements were false and intended to deceive customers.
• Unjust enrichment – Plaintiffs argue that OtterBox benefited financially by refusing to honor warranty claims and avoiding the costs of replacements or repairs while still profiting from product sales. 

If the plaintiffs succeed in their claims, OtterBox could be held liable for damages, consumer reimbursements, and potential changes to its warranty policies.

The Importance of Warranty Rights

Consumer warranties exist to provide value to buyers and protect them from defective products. When a company provides a written warranty, it is legally obligated to uphold its terms. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, a federal law, ensures that companies cannot mislead consumers about warranty protections, while state laws also prohibit deceptive business practices.  

If you have purchased an OtterBox Smartphone Case or Tablet Case and had a valid warranty claim denied within seven years after your purchase, you may be affected by this lawsuit. Here’s what you should consider:

• Check your warranty coverage – review OtterBox’s warranty terms and compare them to your situation.
• Gather evidence – keep records of your purchase, warranty claim submission, and any communication with the company.
• Stay informed about the case – Class-action lawsuits take time, but affected consumers may be eligible for compensation if the plaintiffs are successful.

If you have experienced similar issues with OtterBox’s warranty denials, contact Singleton Schreiber today by calling (619) 771-3473 or emailing info@singletonschreiber.com to learn more about your options.