Maybe the Mayans were right about this whole apocalypse thing. Stirrup pants have returned to haunt shoppers, appearing everywhere to terrify shoppers. But then we at Consumerist received an e-mail about a product intended to turn regular, innocent, civilized, non-stirrup pants into stirrup pants. Why? WHY?
Yes, they’re Barracuda pants—the only trousers that remind you, and anyone within eyesight, that you have a penis.
Kudos to Travis! He lost 35 pounds recently, just in time for swimsuit season. Happy with his weight loss, he took his Men’s Wearhouse suits in for the free alterations for life he was promised at the time of purchase. Unfortunately, Men’s Wearhouse wasn’t as thrilled with Travis shedding his college beer belly. They called his weight loss too extreme for their free alteration program, and demanded $50 per pair of pants. See what Travis has to say about this, inside.
So we obviously unleashed hell on the Zubaz site by linking to it yesterday, but the folks over there seem to have a sense of humor.
Judge Roy “Fancy Pants” Pearson is probably crying his poor, litigious little eyes out this morning. He’s lost his infamous $54 million lawsuit against a local DC dry cleaner. Pearson originally sought $65 million in damages after the cleaner allegedly gave him the wrong pants.
“Never before in recorded history have a group of defendants engaged in such misleading and unfair business practices,” Pearson said in his opening statement. You don’t get a lot of firsts in recorded history in D.C. Superior Court, though I should add that Marion Barry was in the building for his day in traffic court, and the pants suit easily outdrew the ex-mayor-for-life.
It gets better. One of Fancy Pants Pearson’s witnesses testified, comparing the Mom and Pop dry cleaner to Nazi Germany:
“At 89, I’m not ready to be chased,” she said. “But I was in World War II as a WAC, so I think I can take care of myself. Having lived in Germany and knowing the people who were victims of the Nazis, I thought he was going to beat me up. I thought of what Hitler had done to thousands of Jews.”
Wait. It gets better.
You may remember Judge Roy “Fancy Pants” Pearson; he sued his Korean cleaners for $65 million after his pants were misplaced, claiming signs promising “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service” constituted consumer fraud. Judge Fancy Pants has reconsidered his suit, and has reduced his demands to only $54 million. The cleaners’ attorney thinks Fancy Pants is being unreasonable:
Chris Manning, the Chungs’ attorney, says that can be considered fraud only if the signs misled a “reasonable” person. No reasonable person, he says, would interpret them to be an unconditional promise of satisfaction.
We think this is the perfect case to be adjudicated either by Judge Judy, or the Judge Judy Soundboard. — CAREY GREENBERG-BERGER
A DC judge has filed a $65 million suit against a Korean cleaner, claiming that signs promising “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service” constitute consumer fraud. Roy Pearson was appointed to a DC judgeship, a job that requires a suit. The judge brought several suits to Custom Cleaners for alteration, but one pair of pants went missing. So the judge did what any reasonable DC judge might do; he sent the cleaner a different kind of suit: a law suit.
How does he get to $65 million? The District’s consumer protection law provides for damages of $1,500 per violation per day. Pearson started multiplying: 12 violations over 1,200 days, times three defendants. A pant leg here, a pant leg there, and soon, you’re talking $65 million.
The cleaner offered $12,000 to settle the case, but the judge refused. The original cost of the alteration: $10.50 — CAREY GREENBERG-BERGER
Leather seats aren’t supposed to break apart on your two-year-old Acura TSX. So a conscientious owner with miles left on the warranty does what any sensible consumer would do: Take it to a dealership for warranty repair. Not so easy.
But it looks like there are a lot of places online that will do it. I figured that before I went off half cocked and ordered a pair sight unseen, that the Consumerist (or its readers) might have some insight into which services would be good or worth checking out.”