Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:16 AM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,969,876 times
Reputation: 2177

Advertisements

LITIGATION NATION: Lowe’s pays $1.6M settlement over 2×4 labeling

Lowes was sued and they lost because they called a 2X4 a 2x4.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:21 AM
 
12,997 posts, read 13,644,862 times
Reputation: 11192
This wouldn't happen if more good men without qualifications had jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:22 AM
 
7,800 posts, read 4,400,201 times
Reputation: 9438
The problem was that Lowes was not selling a 2x4 but a 1.5 x 3.5. Lowe's therefore violated California's truth in advertising law regarding building materials. According to the article you cite, Lowe's agreed it violated the law and thought the settlement fair. So what's the controversy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:24 AM
 
Location: Steeler Nation
6,897 posts, read 4,752,340 times
Reputation: 1633
2x4's haven't been 2x4's for years, anyone who knows anything about building materials knows this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:29 AM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,969,876 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard View Post
The problem was that Lowes was not selling a 2x4 but a 1.5 x 3.5. Lowe's therefore violated California's truth in advertising law regarding building materials. According to the article you cite, Lowe's agreed it violated the law and thought the settlement fair. So what's the controversy?
Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?

A 2x4 has never been 2 inches by 4 inches by whatever length you wish, unless you refer to 'raw lumber' which never sold in stores.

The sizes refer to the UNFINISHED size of the raw stock - and even THAT was not a full 2 inches by 4 inches. That was the distance the cutting blades were apart, meaning one blade width less than that was the actual dimensions.

No 2x4 in my entire life time has been 2 inches by 4 inches. And anyone not knowing that should never be buying lumber in ANY store, not just Lowes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:30 AM
 
Location: Steeler Nation
6,897 posts, read 4,752,340 times
Reputation: 1633
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard View Post
The problem was that Lowe's was not selling a 2x4 but a 1.5 x 3.5. Lowe's therefore violated California's truth in advertising law regarding building materials. According to the article you cite, Lowe's agreed it violated the law and thought the settlement fair. So what's the controversy?
I think the law suit itself is controversial, the only reason Lowe's settled is because it was cheaper than litigating, which would cost 5 times as much. Lawyers make me sick!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:34 AM
 
7,800 posts, read 4,400,201 times
Reputation: 9438
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?

A 2x4 has never been 2 inches by 4 inches by whatever length you wish, unless you refer to 'raw lumber' which never sold in stores.

The sizes refer to the UNFINISHED size of the raw stock - and even THAT was not a full 2 inches by 4 inches. That was the distance the cutting blades were apart, meaning one blade width less than that was the actual dimensions.

No 2x4 in my entire life time has been 2 inches by 4 inches. And anyone not knowing that should never be buying lumber in ANY store, not just Lowes.
Read the law. It is clear what Lowes had to do, how 2x4s were to be marketed and Lowes violated the law. Lowes agreed it violated the law. Your entire argument is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:35 AM
 
13,685 posts, read 9,009,247 times
Reputation: 10407
At the Lowe's I go to here in Texas they have long had a sign noting the 'actual' size of the piece of lumber. I can't imagine why they weren't doing such in California (note that part of the Court's order was to display such information).

I agree with others: I also can't imagine builders not knowing the actual, in practice, dimensions of lumber after it has been dried.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:36 AM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,969,876 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard View Post
Read the law. It is clear what Lowes had to do, how 2x4s were to be marketed and Lowes violated the law. Lowes agreed it violated the law. Your entire argument is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
You do realize, don't you, that not just lowes, but EVERYBODY who sold lumber sells them by their true name , 2x4?

You do realize, don't you, that fining Lowes 1.6 million due to the complete demonstrated ignorance of fools, and judges going along with this, means none of these people are intelligent or informed enough to continue the human race?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2014, 06:36 AM
 
3,201 posts, read 4,410,406 times
Reputation: 4441
lmao

so some lawyers managed to make over a half million off of peoples ignorance who obviously never picked up a hammer

brilliant

btw, how is this PAOC?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:34 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top