Kroger - Revision history

SquidthePlummer: /* Kroger Loyalty Programs Collects extensive amount of customers data (2025) */ Added 2 more incidents

2026-04-04T22:21:39Z

Kroger Loyalty Programs Collects extensive amount of customers data (2025): Added 2 more incidents

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:21, 4 April 2026
Line 36:		Line 36:
	{{Main\|Kroger Grocery store electronic shelf labels & facial recognition}}		{{Main\|Kroger Grocery store electronic shelf labels & facial recognition}}
	Kroger introduced electronic shelf labels and facial recognition cameras across various stores citing it was for improving customer experience and lower prices. However, customers have raised concerns about price manipulation, privacy violations, and potential discrimination.		Kroger introduced electronic shelf labels and facial recognition cameras across various stores citing it was for improving customer experience and lower prices. However, customers have raised concerns about price manipulation, privacy violations, and potential discrimination.

			=== Overcharging customers who paid discounted items (2025) ===
			Consumer Report, the Guardian, and the Food & Environment Reporting Network released a report on 14 May after conducting an 3 month long investigation into several Kroger stores in the U.S. that revealed several products expired tags were out of date by at least 10 days and were overpriced by around $1.70. Kroger initially responded by saying the investigation was inaccurate. A few weeks later on 29 May, the company announced hiring over 15,000 employees to "enhance the customer experience". Additionally, after publication, employees claimed they were ordered by managers to correct price tags in a matter of days, however the company claims it was false and that it "hasn't issued any orders".<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Kravitz \|first=Derek \|date=14 May 2025 \|title=Kroger Stores Overcharging Shoppers on Sale Items, CR Price Check Finds \|url=https://www.consumerreports.org/money/questionable-business-practices/kroger-stores-overcharging-shoppers-on-sale-items-a9659540552/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=4 April 2026 \|website=Consumer Reports}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Cunningham \|first=Mary \|date=16 May 2025 \|title=Kroger overcharges customers for items marked as being on sale, Consumer Reports finds \|url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/krogers-price-tags-overcharges-consumer-reports/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=4 April 2026 \|website=CBS News}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Hudson \|first=Michael \|last2=Kravitz \|first2=Derek \|last3=Ross \|first3=Theodore \|date=14 May 2025 \|title=‘Customers are being duped’: how murky grocery sales tactics are squeezing some Kroger shoppers \|url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2025/may/14/kroger-supermarket-sales-tactics \|url-status=live \|access-date=4 April 2026 \|website=The Guardian}}</ref><blockquote>''"The characterization of widespread pricing concerns is blatantly false. the complaint noted by Consumer Reports included a few dozen examples across several years out of billions of customers transactions annually. While any error is unacceptable, the characterization of widespread pricing concerns is patently false"''<ref>{{Cite web \|date=15 May 2025 \|title=Investigation finds some Kroger stores are overcharging customers \|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJDYWADkgJ0 \|url-status=live \|access-date=4 April 2026 \|website=Youtube}}</ref></blockquote>

	===Kroger Loyalty Programs Collects extensive amount of customers data (''2025'')===		===Kroger Loyalty Programs Collects extensive amount of customers data (''2025'')===
	{{~~Incomplete section~~}}		An investigation from Consumer Report detailed Kroger extensive usage and gathering of customers signed up into Kroger's loyalty card program, containing customers income level purchase history, educational level, household size, ethnicity, pet ownership, and online behavioral data, adding it then is sold to data brokers, tobacco companies, and healthcare technology companies.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Kravitz \|first=Derek \|date=21 May 2025 \|title=Inside Kroger's Secret Shopper Profiles: Why You May Be Paying More Than Your Neighbors \|url=https://www.consumerreports.org/money/questionable-business-practices/kroger-secret-grocery-shopper-loyalty-profiles-unfair-a1011215563/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=29 March 2026 \|website=Consumer Reports}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=21 May 2025 \|title=Consumer Reports investigation uncovers Kroger’s widespread data collection of loyalty program members to create secret shopper profiles \|url=https://www.consumerreports.org/media-room/press-releases/2025/05/consumer-reports-investigation-uncovers-krogers-widespread-data-collection-of-loyalty-program-members-to-create-secret-shopper-profiles/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=30 March 2026 \|website=Consumer Reports}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Hori \|first=Adrian \|date=25 May 2025 \|title=Kroger’s Data Practices Under Fire: Consumer Reports Exposes Privacy Violations and Discriminatory Pricing \|url=https://captaincompliance.com/education/krogers-data-practices-under-fire-consumer-reports-exposes-privacy-violations-and-discriminatory-pricing/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=30 March 2026 \|website=Captain Compliance}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=23 October 2025 \|title=Consumer Reports investigates the true costs of loyalty programs \|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5umCJXbvQM \|url-status=live \|access-date=4 April 2026 \|website=Youtube}}</ref>

	==Lawsuits==		==Lawsuits==

Sojourna: /* Third Party Vendor Accellion Data Breach (2021.02) */

2026-04-01T01:47:28Z

Third Party Vendor Accellion Data Breach (2021.02)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:47, 1 April 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:
	On 30 March, Kroger emailing firm Epsilon experienced a security breach that leaked customers names and email addresses.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=1 April 2011 \|title=Epsilon Notifies Clients of Unauthorized Entry into Email System \|url=https://www.epsilon.com/News%20&%20Events/Press_Releases_2011/Epsilon_Notifies_Clients_of_Unauthorized_Entry_into_Email_System/p1057-l3 \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110415043816/https://www.epsilon.com/News%20&%20Events/Press_Releases_2011/Epsilon_Notifies_Clients_of_Unauthorized_Entry_into_Email_System/p1057-l3 \|archive-date=15 April 2011 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Epsilon}}</ref> On 01 April, Kroger sent letters to affected customers that described the incident being sourced from a "outside company" and warning customers of phishing attacks and spam.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=1 April 2011 \|title=Spammers Target Kroger Customers \|url=https://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/04/spammers-target-kroger-customers/ \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110403055450/https://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/04/spammers-target-kroger-customers/ \|archive-date=3 April 2011 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=KrebsonSecurity}}</ref> Several organizations asked Epsilon the amount of customers affected, however they had refused to response.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Lennon \|first=Mike \|date=1 April 2011 \|title=Kroger Notifies Customers of Data Breach Stemming from Third-Party Email Vendor \|url=https://www.securityweek.com/kroger-notifies-customers-data-breach-stemming-third-party-email-vendor/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=SecurityWeek}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Sarno \|first=David \|date=5 April 2011 \|title=Hacking of data firm Epsilon exposes customers of 50 firms \|url=https://www.latimes.com/business/la-xpm-2011-apr-05-la-fi-emails-20110405-story.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Los Angeles Times}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2 April 2011 \|title=Data breach hits JPMorgan, Kroger customers \|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/business/data-breach-hits-jpmorgan-kroger-customers-idUSTRE73103G/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Reuters}}</ref>		On 30 March, Kroger emailing firm Epsilon experienced a security breach that leaked customers names and email addresses.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=1 April 2011 \|title=Epsilon Notifies Clients of Unauthorized Entry into Email System \|url=https://www.epsilon.com/News%20&%20Events/Press_Releases_2011/Epsilon_Notifies_Clients_of_Unauthorized_Entry_into_Email_System/p1057-l3 \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110415043816/https://www.epsilon.com/News%20&%20Events/Press_Releases_2011/Epsilon_Notifies_Clients_of_Unauthorized_Entry_into_Email_System/p1057-l3 \|archive-date=15 April 2011 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Epsilon}}</ref> On 01 April, Kroger sent letters to affected customers that described the incident being sourced from a "outside company" and warning customers of phishing attacks and spam.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=1 April 2011 \|title=Spammers Target Kroger Customers \|url=https://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/04/spammers-target-kroger-customers/ \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110403055450/https://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/04/spammers-target-kroger-customers/ \|archive-date=3 April 2011 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=KrebsonSecurity}}</ref> Several organizations asked Epsilon the amount of customers affected, however they had refused to response.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Lennon \|first=Mike \|date=1 April 2011 \|title=Kroger Notifies Customers of Data Breach Stemming from Third-Party Email Vendor \|url=https://www.securityweek.com/kroger-notifies-customers-data-breach-stemming-third-party-email-vendor/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=SecurityWeek}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Sarno \|first=David \|date=5 April 2011 \|title=Hacking of data firm Epsilon exposes customers of 50 firms \|url=https://www.latimes.com/business/la-xpm-2011-apr-05-la-fi-emails-20110405-story.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Los Angeles Times}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=2 April 2011 \|title=Data breach hits JPMorgan, Kroger customers \|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/business/data-breach-hits-jpmorgan-kroger-customers-idUSTRE73103G/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Reuters}}</ref>

	===Third ~~Party Vendor~~ Accellion ~~Data Breach~~ (''2021~~.02~~'')===		===Third-party vendor Accellion data breach (''2021'')===
	{{Main\|Accellion ~~Data Breach~~}}		{{Main\|Accellion data breach}}

	Mid December in 2020, Kroger was involved in a data breach that resulted in around 50 customers leaking personal after hacker infiltrated Accellion systems. Kroger became aware of the incident in 27 January, and after conducting an investigation, released a statement around 19 February.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Accellion Incident \|url=https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210219235325/https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|archive-date=19 February 2021 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Kroger}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Burgess \|first=Monica \|date=31 October 2025 \|title=Accellion Data Breach \|url=https://www.huntress.com/threat-library/data-breach/accellion-data-breach \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Huntress}}</ref>		Mid December in 2020, Kroger was involved in a data breach that resulted in around 50 customers leaking personal after hacker infiltrated Accellion systems. Kroger became aware of the incident in 27 January, and after conducting an investigation, released a statement around 19 February.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Accellion Incident \|url=https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210219235325/https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|archive-date=19 February 2021 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Kroger}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Burgess \|first=Monica \|date=31 October 2025 \|title=Accellion Data Breach \|url=https://www.huntress.com/threat-library/data-breach/accellion-data-breach \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Huntress}}</ref>

SquidthePlummer: /* Products */

2026-03-29T20:46:41Z

Products

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:46, 29 March 2026
Line 57:		Line 57:
	!'''Controversies'''		!'''Controversies'''
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Abound'''		\|'''[[Abound]]'''
	\|Pet Food		\|Pet Food
	\|		\|https://web.archive.org/web/20190722211447/https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls-market-withdrawals-safety-alerts/kroger-louisville-division-recalls-abound-chicken-and-brown-rice-dog-food-because-elevated-vitamin-d
			https://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-recalls/harris-teeter-abound-dog-food-recall/
			https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/kroger-class-action-claims-abound-dog-food-is-falsely-advertised-as-premium-due-to-hidden-preservatives/
			https://efoodalert.com/2018/12/07/dogs-reported-sick-kroger-king-soopers-pull-abound-brand-from-stores/
			https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2018/12/dogs-reported-sick-kroger-king-soopers-pull-abound-brand-from-stores/
			https://articles.hepper.com/abound-dog-food-review/
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Bakery Fresh Goodness'''		\|'''Bakery Fresh Goodness'''
	\|Fresh baked goods		\|Fresh baked goods
	\|		\|https://www.usrecallnews.com/kroger-recalls-bakery-fresh-goodness-chocolate-brownies-due-to-undeclared-allergens/ - chocolate borwnies recall
			https://web.archive.org/web/20190820032930/https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls-market-withdrawals-safety-alerts/fred-meyer-recalls-bakery-fresh-goodness-carrot-cupcakes-due-undeclared-allergens carrot cupcakes recall
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Bloom Haus'''		\|'''Bloom Haus'''
Line 74:		Line 80:
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Dip'''		\|'''Dip'''
	\|[[wikipedia:Fast_fashion\|Fast fashion]] brand		\|[[wikipedia:Fast_fashion\|Fast fashion]] brand
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
Line 94:		Line 100:
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Kroger Brand'''		\|'''Kroger Brand'''
	\|Grocery Items		\|Grocery Items
	\|https://www.classaction.org/news/kroger-blueberry-fruit-and-grain-cereal-bars-not-as-naturally-flavored-as-advertised-class-action-alleges		\|https://www.classaction.org/news/kroger-blueberry-fruit-and-grain-cereal-bars-not-as-naturally-flavored-as-advertised-class-action-alleges
	https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/food/kroger-class-action-alleges-company-falsely-advertises-blueberry-cereal-bars/		https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/food/kroger-class-action-alleges-company-falsely-advertises-blueberry-cereal-bars/
Line 119:		Line 125:
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Private Selection'''		\|'''Private Selection'''
	\|Higher end quality grocery items		\|Higher end quality grocery items
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-

SquidthePlummer: /* Products */ added descriptions

2026-03-29T20:29:34Z

Products: added descriptions

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:29, 29 March 2026
Line 58:		Line 58:
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Abound'''		\|'''Abound'''
	\|		\|Pet Food
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Bakery Fresh Goodness'''		\|'''Bakery Fresh Goodness'''
	\|		\|Fresh baked goods
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Bloom Haus'''		\|'''Bloom Haus'''
			\|Floral arrangements
	\|		\|
			\|-
			\|'''Comforts'''
			\|baby products
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''~~Comforts~~'''		\|'''Dip'''
			\|[[wikipedia:Fast_fashion\|Fast fashion]] brand
	\|		\|
			\|-
			\|'''Everyday Livin'''
			\|Inside home goods
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''~~Dip~~'''		\|'''HD Design'''
			\|upscale home goods
	\|		\|
			\|-
			\|'''HemisFares'''
			\|Imported Hispanic and Latin food
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Home Chef'''		\|'''Home Chef'''
	\|		\|Meal Kit delivery service
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Kroger Brand'''		\|'''Kroger Brand'''
	\|		\|Grocery Items
	\|https://www.classaction.org/news/kroger-blueberry-fruit-and-grain-cereal-bars-not-as-naturally-flavored-as-advertised-class-action-alleges		\|https://www.classaction.org/news/kroger-blueberry-fruit-and-grain-cereal-bars-not-as-naturally-flavored-as-advertised-class-action-alleges
	https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/food/kroger-class-action-alleges-company-falsely-advertises-blueberry-cereal-bars/		https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/food/kroger-class-action-alleges-company-falsely-advertises-blueberry-cereal-bars/
			\|-
			\|'''Kroger Mercado'''
			\|Hispanic and Latin food products
			\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Luvsome'''		\|'''Luvsome'''
	\|		\|Pet Food
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Murray's Cheese'''		\|'''Murray's Cheese'''
			\|Artisanal cheese shop
	\|		\|
			\|-
			\|'''OfficeWorks'''
			\|stationery and office supplies
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Pet Pride'''		\|'''Pet Pride'''
	\|		\|Pet Food
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Private Selection'''		\|'''Private Selection'''
	\|		\|Higher end quality grocery items
	\|		\|
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''[[Simple Truths]]'''		\|'''[[Simple Truths]]'''
	\|		\|Organic and natural product
	\|https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/kroger-class-action-alleges-simple-truth-bars-contain-preservatives/		\|https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/kroger-class-action-alleges-simple-truth-bars-contain-preservatives/
	\|-		\|-
	\|'''Smart Way'''		\|'''Smart Way'''
	\|		\|Lower cost household products
	\|		\|
	\|}		\|}

SquidthePlummer: Added 1 more incident

2026-03-29T20:04:55Z

Added 1 more incident

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:04, 29 March 2026
Line 17:		Line 17:
	*Evidence Tampering		*Evidence Tampering

	==Incidents~~<!-- planning on creating incidents for a lot of these articles -->~~==		==Incidents==
	This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}\|{{PAGENAME}} category]].		This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}\|{{PAGENAME}} category]].

Line 46:		Line 46:
	On 16 November 2018, the court reversed the dismissal, citing the plaintiff had enough evidence due to "adequately alleged that she relied on the label’s misrepresentations and would not have purchased the product without those misrepresentations", along with the plaintiff label statement decided to not be preempted by federal regulations.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. The Kroger Co., No. 16-55532 (9th Cir. 2018) \|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/16-55532/16-55532-2018-10-04.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Justia Law}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=HAWKINS v. KROGER COMPANY (2018) \|url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-9th-circuit/1956219.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=FindLaw}}</ref> Kroger filed a motion to dismiss the case on 08 November 2019, citing the plaintiff lack evidence, however it was denied on 04 April 2019.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. Kroger Co. \|url=https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/hawkins-v-kroger-co-885587347 \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=vLex}}</ref>		On 16 November 2018, the court reversed the dismissal, citing the plaintiff had enough evidence due to "adequately alleged that she relied on the label’s misrepresentations and would not have purchased the product without those misrepresentations", along with the plaintiff label statement decided to not be preempted by federal regulations.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. The Kroger Co., No. 16-55532 (9th Cir. 2018) \|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/16-55532/16-55532-2018-10-04.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Justia Law}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=HAWKINS v. KROGER COMPANY (2018) \|url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-9th-circuit/1956219.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=FindLaw}}</ref> Kroger filed a motion to dismiss the case on 08 November 2019, citing the plaintiff lack evidence, however it was denied on 04 April 2019.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. Kroger Co. \|url=https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/hawkins-v-kroger-co-885587347 \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=vLex}}</ref>

	After denial, Kroger began delaying the court process across several court hearing and refusing to apply plaintiffs with additional information, only occasionally giving information however it was unsupported formats or irrelevant information, citing it was acting on a legal basis. Additionally, the comapny made a request to deny plaintiff file to motion, citing the evidence and discovery was "preempted". The plaintiff responded with the following;<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Shavonda HAWKINS on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. The KROGER COMPANY, Defendant \|url=https://app.minerva26.com/case_law/25340-hawkins-v-kroger-co \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Minerva26}}</ref><blockquote>"[t]he reality: our meet and confer efforts consisted of two conference calls between counsel, a third with the Court’s clerk, a formal 5-page letter, a large number of e-mails, and multiple offers of compromise. All this resulted in a total of zero substantive interrogatory responses and a total of 17 pages produced in partial response to one RFP."</blockquote>The court eventually addressed this in a 16 September 2019 court case, ruling Plaintiff’s right to file a motion to compel and giving the company more time to create an response.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. Kroger Co., Case No.: 15cv2320-JM(BLM) \|url=https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/hawkins-v-kroger-co-894217484 \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=vLex}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. The Kroger Company, No. 3:2015cv02320 - Document 72 (S.D. Cal. 2019) \|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/casdce/3:2015cv02320/486913/72/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Justia}}</ref><ref name=":0" /><blockquote>"Defendant asserted lengthy objections to each request, did not provide a substantive response to any of the interrogatories or RFPs, and did not produce any responsive documents or indicate a willingness to produce any documents. This is unacceptable and not in compliance with the spirit or requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. To make matters worse, Defendant supplemented its responses on July 11, 2019 but the supplemental responses provided minimal substance and Defendant did not produce any documents."</blockquote>Due to Kroger repeated failure in producing documents, the court gave the company a deadline till 07 October, however the company failed to meet past the deadline. In a 23 April 2020 case hearing, the court highlighted the company constant refusal to provide information, resulting in the court ordering Krogers councels Heather Canner and Jacob Harper 8 hours of Continuing Legal Education, with half of which delving into ethics and discovery practices.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=HAWKINS v. KROGER COMPANY (2021) \|url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-s-d-cal/2108265.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=FindLaw}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. The Kroger Company, No. 3:2015cv02320 - Document 140 (S.D. Cal. 2020) \|url=https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/classaura-announces-kroger-bread-crumbs-class-action-settlement-301355399.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Justia Law}}</ref> <blockquote>"Here, it is apparent to the Court from defense counsel’s persistent evasion of providing full discovery responses to Plaintiff, even in the face of an order compelling Defendant to do so and issuing monetary sanctions, that simply issuing monetary sanctions under Rule 37(b)(2)(C) a second time is not “up to the task” of adequately addressing the discovery abuses before the Court. the Court is left with the impression that either Kroger’s counsel earnestly—and mistakenly—believes their approach to discovery is consistent with the rules, or else they are operating under “a sporting chance theory encouraging parties to withhold vital information from the other side with the hope that the withholding may not be discovered and, if so, that it would only result in a fine"</blockquote>On January 24, 2021, the case reached a settlement of $780,000, requiring the company compensate affected customer up to $100. Kroger claims it reached a settlement to avoids the burden of continuing legal proceedings.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=17 August 2021 \|title=Kroger Bread Crumbs $780K False Advertising Class Action Settlement \|url=https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/closed-settlements/kroger-bread-crumbs-780k-false-advertising-class-action-settlement/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Top Class Action}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Kroger Bread Crumb Settlement (CA only) \|url=https://classactionrebates.com/settlements-1/kroger-bread-crumb/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=classactionrebates}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|first= \|date=16 August 2021 \|title=Classaura Announces Kroger Bread Crumbs Class Action Settlement \|url=https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/classaura-announces-kroger-bread-crumbs-class-action-settlement-301355399.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=PR Newswire}}</ref>		After denial, Kroger began delaying the court process across several court hearing and refusing to apply plaintiffs with additional information, only occasionally giving information however it was unsupported formats or irrelevant information, citing it was acting on a legal basis. Additionally, the comapny made a request to deny plaintiff file to motion, citing the evidence and discovery was "preempted". The plaintiff responded with the following;<ref name=":0">{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Shavonda HAWKINS on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. The KROGER COMPANY, Defendant \|url=https://app.minerva26.com/case_law/25340-hawkins-v-kroger-co \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Minerva26}}</ref><blockquote>''"[t]he reality: our meet and confer efforts consisted of two conference calls between counsel, a third with the Court’s clerk, a formal 5-page letter, a large number of e-mails, and multiple offers of compromise. All this resulted in a total of zero substantive interrogatory responses and a total of 17 pages produced in partial response to one RFP."''</blockquote>The court eventually addressed this in a 16 September 2019 court case, ruling Plaintiff’s right to file a motion to compel and giving the company more time to create an response.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. Kroger Co., Case No.: 15cv2320-JM(BLM) \|url=https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/hawkins-v-kroger-co-894217484 \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=vLex}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. The Kroger Company, No. 3:2015cv02320 - Document 72 (S.D. Cal. 2019) \|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/casdce/3:2015cv02320/486913/72/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Justia}}</ref><ref name=":0" /><blockquote>''"Defendant asserted lengthy objections to each request, did not provide a substantive response to any of the interrogatories or RFPs, and did not produce any responsive documents or indicate a willingness to produce any documents. This is unacceptable and not in compliance with the spirit or requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. To make matters worse, Defendant supplemented its responses on July 11, 2019 but the supplemental responses provided minimal substance and Defendant did not produce any documents."''</blockquote>Due to Kroger repeated failure in producing documents, the court gave the company a deadline till 07 October, however the company failed to meet past the deadline. In a 23 April 2020 case hearing, the court highlighted the company constant refusal to provide information, resulting in the court ordering Krogers councels Heather Canner and Jacob Harper 8 hours of Continuing Legal Education, with half of which delving into ethics and discovery practices.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=HAWKINS v. KROGER COMPANY (2021) \|url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-s-d-cal/2108265.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=FindLaw}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Hawkins v. The Kroger Company, No. 3:2015cv02320 - Document 140 (S.D. Cal. 2020) \|url=https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/classaura-announces-kroger-bread-crumbs-class-action-settlement-301355399.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Justia Law}}</ref> <blockquote>''"Here, it is apparent to the Court from defense counsel’s persistent evasion of providing full discovery responses to Plaintiff, even in the face of an order compelling Defendant to do so and issuing monetary sanctions, that simply issuing monetary sanctions under Rule 37(b)(2)(C) a second time is not “up to the task” of adequately addressing the discovery abuses before the Court. the Court is left with the impression that either Kroger’s counsel earnestly—and mistakenly—believes their approach to discovery is consistent with the rules, or else they are operating under “a sporting chance theory encouraging parties to withhold vital information from the other side with the hope that the withholding may not be discovered and, if so, that it would only result in a fine"''</blockquote>On January 24, 2021, the case reached a settlement of $780,000, requiring the company compensate affected customer up to $100. Kroger claims it reached a settlement to avoids the burden of continuing legal proceedings.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=17 August 2021 \|title=Kroger Bread Crumbs $780K False Advertising Class Action Settlement \|url=https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/closed-settlements/kroger-bread-crumbs-780k-false-advertising-class-action-settlement/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Top Class Action}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Kroger Bread Crumb Settlement (CA only) \|url=https://classactionrebates.com/settlements-1/kroger-bread-crumb/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=classactionrebates}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|first= \|date=16 August 2021 \|title=Classaura Announces Kroger Bread Crumbs Class Action Settlement \|url=https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/classaura-announces-kroger-bread-crumbs-class-action-settlement-301355399.html \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=PR Newswire}}</ref>

	~~===Website Monitoring Lawsuit (''2022'')===~~
	~~https://www.classaction.org/news/california-consumer-sues-bjs-kroger-aig-aflac-over-alleged-website-monitoring~~

	===Misleading Prescription drug prices (''2026'')===		===Misleading Prescription drug prices (''2026'')===
	https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/kroger-agrees-to-17m-class-action-settlement-over-prescription-drug-prices/		Plaintiff Judy Kirkbride filed a class action complaint against Kroger on 05 January 2021 over allegedly conducting an pricing scheme on customers with third-party insurance providers on prescription medication products.<ref>{{Cite web \|last=Webster \|first=Katherine \|date=5 January 2021 \|title=Kroger Overcharges Insurance for Generic Drugs Claims, Class Action Lawsuit \|url=https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/kroger-overcharges-insurance-for-generic-drugs-claims-class-action-lawsuit/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=29 March 2026 \|website=Top Class Action}}</ref> Plaintiff claims the company mislead customers by excluding Rx Savings Club discount from "[[wikipedia:Usual,_customary_and_reasonable\|usual and customary prices]]", resulting in customers overpaying for medication products.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=29 March 2026 \|title=Kirkbride v. The Kroger Co., No. 2:2021cv00022 - Document 42 (S.D. Ohio 2022) \|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/ohio/ohsdce/2:2021cv00022/250145/42/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=29 March 2026 \|website=Justia U.S. Law}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=29 March 2026 \|title=Kirkbride v. The Kroger Co., No. 2:2021cv00022 - Document 153 (S.D. Ohio 2025) \|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/ohio/ohsdce/2:2021cv00022/250145/153/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=29 March 2026 \|website=Justia U.S. Law}}</ref> Kroger denied the claims, arguing it has "no duty to disclose its [[wikipedia:Usual,_customary_and_reasonable\|usual and customary prices]]". <ref>{{Cite web \|date=28 June 2021 \|title=IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION \|url=https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ohsd-2_21-cv-00022/pdf/USCOURTS-ohsd-2_21-cv-00022-0.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=29 March 2026 \|website=govinfo.gov}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=29 March 2026 \|title=IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION \|url=https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/ohio/ohsdce/2:2021cv00022/250145/62/0.pdf \|url-status=live \|access-date=29 March 2026 \|website=Justia U.S. Law}}</ref> The case would reach a $17 million settlement in late March 2026, compensating customers purchases between 09 December 2018 .<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Kroger Had a Discount Prescription Club. Insured Customers Say They Never Got the Benefit — and Overpaid Every Time. \|url=https://allaboutlawyer.com/kroger-17000000-prescription-drug-copay-inflation-settlement/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=29 March 2026 \|website=All About Lawyer}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|date=24 March 2026 \|title=Kroger agrees to $17M class action settlement over prescription drug prices \|url=https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/kroger-agrees-to-17m-class-action-settlement-over-prescription-drug-prices/ \|url-status=live \|access-date=28 March 2026 \|website=Top Class Action}}</ref>

	==Products==		==Products==

SquidthePlummer: added stub notice

2026-03-29T18:21:38Z

added stub notice

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:21, 29 March 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{CompanyCargo		{{StubNotice}}{{CompanyCargo
	\|Founded=1883		\|Founded=1883
	\|Industry=Retail		\|Industry=Retail

SquidthePlummer: /* Third Party Vendor Accellion Data Breach (2021.02) */ added 2021 security breach link to incident

2026-03-27T04:17:18Z

Third Party Vendor Accellion Data Breach (2021.02): added 2021 security breach link to incident

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:17, 27 March 2026
Line 25:		Line 25:

	===Third Party Vendor Accellion Data Breach (''2021.02'')===		===Third Party Vendor Accellion Data Breach (''2021.02'')===
			{{Main\|Accellion Data Breach}}
	Mid December in 2020, Kroger was involved in a data breach that resulted in around 50 customers leaking personal after hacker infiltrated Accellion systems. Kroger became aware of the incident in 27 January, and after conducting an investigation, released a statement around 19 February.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Accellion Incident \|url=https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210219235325/https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|archive-date=19 February 2021 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Kroger}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Burgess \|first=Monica \|date=31 October 2025 \|title=Accellion Data Breach \|url=https://www.huntress.com/threat-library/data-breach/accellion-data-breach \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Huntress}}</ref>		Mid December in 2020, Kroger was involved in a data breach that resulted in around 50 customers leaking personal after hacker infiltrated Accellion systems. Kroger became aware of the incident in 27 January, and after conducting an investigation, released a statement around 19 February.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Accellion Incident \|url=https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210219235325/https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|archive-date=19 February 2021 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Kroger}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Burgess \|first=Monica \|date=31 October 2025 \|title=Accellion Data Breach \|url=https://www.huntress.com/threat-library/data-breach/accellion-data-breach \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Huntress}}</ref>

SquidthePlummer: lmao, wasn't my intention for that-- sincerest apologies

2026-03-26T10:40:16Z

lmao, wasn't my intention for that-- sincerest apologies

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:40, 26 March 2026
Line 28:		Line 28:

	===Kroger merger deal with Albertson (''2024'')===		===Kroger merger deal with Albertson (''2024'')===
			{{Main\|Kroger merger deal with Albertson}}
	On 10 December 2024, the Federal Trade Commission block a $24.6 Billion merger agreement between Kroger and Albertsons over risk of higher food prices and fewer product choices. A day later, both companies filed lawsuits against each other.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=10 December 2024 \|title=Statement on FTC Victory Securing Halt to Kroger, Albertsons Grocery Merger \|url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/statement-ftc-victory-securing-halt-kroger-albertsons-grocery-merger \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250102182554/https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/statement-ftc-victory-securing-halt-kroger-albertsons-grocery-merger \|archive-date=2 January 2025 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Durbin \|first=Dee \|date=11 December 2024 \|title=Albertsons sues Kroger for failing to win approval of their proposed supermarket merger \|url=https://apnews.com/article/kroger-albertsons-79e366723d7287b2df71d96730fba76e \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=AP News}}</ref>		On 10 December 2024, the Federal Trade Commission block a $24.6 Billion merger agreement between Kroger and Albertsons over risk of higher food prices and fewer product choices. A day later, both companies filed lawsuits against each other.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=10 December 2024 \|title=Statement on FTC Victory Securing Halt to Kroger, Albertsons Grocery Merger \|url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/statement-ftc-victory-securing-halt-kroger-albertsons-grocery-merger \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250102182554/https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/statement-ftc-victory-securing-halt-kroger-albertsons-grocery-merger \|archive-date=2 January 2025 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Durbin \|first=Dee \|date=11 December 2024 \|title=Albertsons sues Kroger for failing to win approval of their proposed supermarket merger \|url=https://apnews.com/article/kroger-albertsons-79e366723d7287b2df71d96730fba76e \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=AP News}}</ref>

SinexTitan: who tf linked different instances to a single instance?

2026-03-26T07:13:26Z

who tf linked different instances to a single instance?

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:13, 26 March 2026
Line 25:		Line 25:

	===Third Party Vendor Accellion Data Breach (''2021.02'')===		===Third Party Vendor Accellion Data Breach (''2021.02'')===
	~~{{Main\|Kroger Grocery store electronic shelf labels & facial recognition}}~~
	Mid December in 2020, Kroger was involved in a data breach that resulted in around 50 customers leaking personal after hacker infiltrated Accellion systems. Kroger became aware of the incident in 27 January, and after conducting an investigation, released a statement around 19 February.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Accellion Incident \|url=https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210219235325/https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|archive-date=19 February 2021 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Kroger}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Burgess \|first=Monica \|date=31 October 2025 \|title=Accellion Data Breach \|url=https://www.huntress.com/threat-library/data-breach/accellion-data-breach \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Huntress}}</ref>		Mid December in 2020, Kroger was involved in a data breach that resulted in around 50 customers leaking personal after hacker infiltrated Accellion systems. Kroger became aware of the incident in 27 January, and after conducting an investigation, released a statement around 19 February.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=25 March 2026 \|title=Accellion Incident \|url=https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210219235325/https://www.kroger.com/i/accellion-incident \|archive-date=19 February 2021 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Kroger}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Burgess \|first=Monica \|date=31 October 2025 \|title=Accellion Data Breach \|url=https://www.huntress.com/threat-library/data-breach/accellion-data-breach \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Huntress}}</ref>

	===Kroger merger deal with Albertson (''2024'')===		===Kroger merger deal with Albertson (''2024'')===
	~~{{Main\|Kroger Grocery store electronic shelf labels & facial recognition}}~~
	On 10 December 2024, the Federal Trade Commission block a $24.6 Billion merger agreement between Kroger and Albertsons over risk of higher food prices and fewer product choices. A day later, both companies filed lawsuits against each other.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=10 December 2024 \|title=Statement on FTC Victory Securing Halt to Kroger, Albertsons Grocery Merger \|url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/statement-ftc-victory-securing-halt-kroger-albertsons-grocery-merger \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250102182554/https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/statement-ftc-victory-securing-halt-kroger-albertsons-grocery-merger \|archive-date=2 January 2025 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Durbin \|first=Dee \|date=11 December 2024 \|title=Albertsons sues Kroger for failing to win approval of their proposed supermarket merger \|url=https://apnews.com/article/kroger-albertsons-79e366723d7287b2df71d96730fba76e \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=AP News}}</ref>		On 10 December 2024, the Federal Trade Commission block a $24.6 Billion merger agreement between Kroger and Albertsons over risk of higher food prices and fewer product choices. A day later, both companies filed lawsuits against each other.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=10 December 2024 \|title=Statement on FTC Victory Securing Halt to Kroger, Albertsons Grocery Merger \|url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/statement-ftc-victory-securing-halt-kroger-albertsons-grocery-merger \|url-status=live \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250102182554/https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/12/statement-ftc-victory-securing-halt-kroger-albertsons-grocery-merger \|archive-date=2 January 2025 \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web \|last=Durbin \|first=Dee \|date=11 December 2024 \|title=Albertsons sues Kroger for failing to win approval of their proposed supermarket merger \|url=https://apnews.com/article/kroger-albertsons-79e366723d7287b2df71d96730fba76e \|url-status=live \|access-date=25 March 2026 \|website=AP News}}</ref>

Line 37:		Line 35:

	===Kroger Loyalty Programs Collects extensive amount of customers data (''2025'')===		===Kroger Loyalty Programs Collects extensive amount of customers data (''2025'')===
	~~{{Main\|Kroger Grocery store electronic shelf labels & facial recognition}}~~{{Incomplete section}}		{{Incomplete section}}

	==Lawsuits==		==Lawsuits==

SinexTitan: format fix

2026-03-26T07:12:04Z

format fix

Show changes