Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Rader, Greene County, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    10,833

    Big Grin Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Beekeepers have an interest in 'nominal' lumber sizes - threads sometimes revolve around the issue of a 1x10 board not being 'tall' enough to make a deep hive body (which requires a 9 5/8" board). So I laughed when I saw this article:

    MILWAUKEE — Two home improvements stores are accused of deceiving the buyers of four-by-four boards, the big brother to the ubiquitous two-by-four.

    The alleged deception: Menards and Home Depot (HD) market and sell the hefty lumber as four-by-fours without specifying that the boards actually measure 3˝ inches by 3˝ inches.

    The lawsuits against the retailers would-be class actions, filed within five days of each other in federal court for the Northern District of Illinois. Attorneys from the same Chicago law firm represent the plaintiffs in both cases. Each suit seeks more than $5 million.

    “Defendant has received significant profits from its false marketing and sale of its dimensional lumber products,” the action against Menards contends.

    More here:
    https://www.livingstondaily.com/stor...uit/415874001/
    Of course, whatever the outcome of this lawsuit, actual lumber sizes are very unlikely to change.




    If you'd like to see a reference for current nominal vs actual sizing for "1x", 2x" and on up to "8x" lumber, see this link:
    https://www.archtoolbox.com/material...vs-actual.html

    .
    Last edited by Rader Sidetrack; 06-22-2017 at 06:30 AM. Reason: add sizing chart link
    Graham
    USDA Zone 7A Elevation 1400 ft

  2. Remove Advertisements
    BeeSource.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Robeson County, North Carolina
    Posts
    737

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Wait until they find out that all those 2x4s are actually 1 1/2" x 3 1/2". Heads are going to roll.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Lake county, Indiana 46408-4109
    Posts
    3,533

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    There must bee a LOT of room under that rock, BUT the lawyers will make BIG BUX
    Ed, KA9CTT profanity is IGNORANCE made audible
    you can`t fix stupid not even with duct tape

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Auckland,Auckland,New Zealand
    Posts
    9,944

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Joking aside, I'd be pretty upset to buy 4x4 and find it's 3 1/2 by 3 1/2. They deserve their punishment.
    "Every viewpoint, is a view from a point." - Solomon Parker

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Suffolk Co, NY, USA
    Posts
    3,625

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    The court should throw that law firm and the lawsuit right out of court. A money grab and nothing more, they should be ashamed.
    Nominal green rough lumber is available in the stated dimensions, buy that if you want a 4x4 and measures it. Yeah, lumber yards sell it, and
    lumber mills
    Dimensional lumber is cured and dressed and the standard sizes have been around for 50 years, maybe more. The dimensional sizes
    equate to US Standard sizes for cured and planed lumber, this ain't nothing new.
    The box stores named should simply label their lumber 'dimensional pine 1x12' and be done with it. Then those money seeking weekend warrior DIY lawyers can stand in the isles scratching their backsides trying to figure out what size lumber to buy for the lemonade stand they are trying to build.

    Amazing to me that this is what things have come to.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Rader, Greene County, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    10,833

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    In the USA lumber marketplace, there has been a difference between nominal and actual lumber dimensions for more than 100 years, according to this US Forest Service historical review:
    https://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/m...scpub_6409.pdf

    Back when most lumber was cut from trees near the building site, regional preferences in the finished size of boards developed. But when the growth of the national railroad network allowed relatively 'cheap' long distance transportation of lumber (and other goods), standardized lumber sizes across the country became common.

    As railroad transportation typically was billed by weight, 'planed' boards (less weight than 'rough') gained a transportation cost advantage, and the actual dimensions of lumber were gradually reduced over a period of multiple decades.

    That Forest Service document was published in 1964, and at that time a 1x10 was 0.75" by 9.5", but since then it has shrunk to 0.75" by 9.25"
    Graham
    USDA Zone 7A Elevation 1400 ft

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Suffolk Co, NY, USA
    Posts
    3,625

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Quote Originally Posted by Rader Sidetrack View Post
    In the USA lumber marketplace, there has been a difference between nominal and actual lumber dimensions for more than 100 years, according to this US Forest Service historical review:
    https://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/m...scpub_6409.pdf

    Back when most lumber was cut from trees near the building site, regional preferences in the finished size of boards developed. But when the growth of the national railroad network allowed relatively 'cheap' long distance transportation of lumber (and other goods), standardized lumber sizes across the country became common.

    As railroad transportation typically was billed by weight, 'planed' boards (less weight than 'rough') gained a transportation cost advantage, and the actual dimensions of lumber were gradually reduced over a period of multiple decades.

    That Forest Service document was published in 1964, and at that time a 1x10 was 0.75" by 9.5", but since then it has shrunk to 0.75" by 9.25"
    I am a woodworker that works in circa 1800's houses. No two structural pieces in those houses is perfect or the same size, the exception is the lumber for the finished surfaces which have been worked to get them nearly uniform. Most guys don't even have the tools anymore to work the nominal lumber, the know how to work with it, can read it or can wait for moisture levels to come down.
    A nominal 2x4 hits the jobsite with minimum green dimensions of 2x4 inches, minimum dimensions is the operative word. Then the lumber cures changing the dimensions. Then there is flooring.
    And lumber today is not the lumber of yesteryear.

    Those named in the suit are doing the general public a favor selling dimensional lumber and should be applauded not taken to court. Deceiving the public? nonsense.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Marshall county, AL
    Posts
    3,404

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Anyone in the US that doesn't know that nominal lumber dimensions aren't the same as dressed/finished lumber dimensions shouldnt operate the tools used to cut lumber or they'll likely wind up losing an a body part.

    I still think that if a bee supply place would start selling frames that would give the correct bee space for modern lumber dimensions, they'd hit a gold mine. If I could buy dressed 1x10's and make deeps and buy frames that would work in those boxes I'd be all over that.
    The more I learn about bees, the less I know.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Farmington, New Mexico
    Posts
    8,315

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    I wonder what will happen out here in the West when someone figures out their 10-gallon cowboy hat only holds a gallon or so...
    Nobody ruins my day without my permission, and I refuse to grant it...

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Jonestown, Colunbia County,PA
    Posts
    86

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Bee View Post
    I still think that if a bee supply place would start selling frames that would give the correct bee space for modern lumber dimensions, they'd hit a gold mine. If I could buy dressed 1x10's and make deeps and buy frames that would work in those boxes I'd be all over that.
    I made some deep boxes with 1X10s. Just glue and staple a strip along the bottom edge to make up the difference. Minor amount of extra work compared to cutting all the joints or the cost of 1X12 lumber.

  12. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Parthenon, Ar,USA
    Posts
    263

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    This story is at the same time funny and sad. I laughed out loud at first, then was saddened that we live in a society with such vultures.
    Neill
    Herbhome Farm USDA zone 7a

  13. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina
    Posts
    3,406

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    There's more to this story than alot of you are thinking.

    The lawsuit targets 4x4 lumber against HD and Menards, and 1x6 lumber against Menards. The lawyers are well aware that every other board being sold is less than the "inches" equivalent, but they aren't naming those boards in the lawsuit. If they did, and won, their damages would probably be 20x larger (as HD sells one heck of a lot more 2x4's than 4x4's). They also aren't suing Lowes.

    What's the difference? The labels.

    The lawsuit isn't saying they have a problem with dimensional lumber vs actual lumber. The lawsuit is saying that HD specifically labeled 4x4's different than it did other lumber (and for Menards 1x6's as well). I don't know what that labeling difference is though, as I didn't read the complaint. That's what the complaint is about. How HD's label was.

    For example, if HD labeled their 2x4's as 2 x 4 but labeled their 4x4's as " 4 x 4 it would lead the average (non carpenter) consumer to believe that the extra " had a meaning, or that it was actually 4 inches by 4 inches, rather than a generic 4 by 4 board (as a 2x4 is labeled).

    I for one think the lawsuit has merit. It's stupid, no doubt. And I have no idea what, if any, actual damages exists. But if HD chose to label the 4x4's differently than their other lumber, the question is why? Was it an accident, that happened in EVERY store over the past X years? Or was it an oversight that happened long ago? Or was it an innocent error that led to deception of some percentage of customers? Who knows.

    But the lawsuit isn't about claiming customers thought they were purchasing actual lumber dimensions when they got normal lumber dimensions on all lumber.

  14. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Marshall county, AL
    Posts
    3,404

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Quote Originally Posted by Specialkayme View Post
    Or was it an innocent error that led to deception of some percentage of customers?
    What were the customers being deceived about? They wanted a square, pressure treated post and they got one. Who gives a crap if it's 3 1/2 x 3 1/2 or 4 x 4 as long as they are the same? It's not like they were buying them by the board foot where actual dimensions would matter, they were buying them by the piece.
    The more I learn about bees, the less I know.

  15. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Suffolk Co, NY, USA
    Posts
    3,625

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Quote Originally Posted by Specialkayme View Post
    There's more to this story than alot of you are thinking.

    The lawsuit targets 4x4 lumber against HD and Menards, and 1x6 lumber against Menards. The lawyers are well aware that every other board being sold is less than the "inches" equivalent, but they aren't naming those boards in the lawsuit. If they did, and won, their damages would probably be 20x larger (as HD sells one heck of a lot more 2x4's than 4x4's). They also aren't suing Lowes.

    What's the difference? The labels.

    The lawsuit isn't saying they have a problem with dimensional lumber vs actual lumber. The lawsuit is saying that HD specifically labeled 4x4's different than it did other lumber (and for Menards 1x6's as well). I don't know what that labeling difference is though, as I didn't read the complaint. That's what the complaint is about. How HD's label was.

    For example, if HD labeled their 2x4's as 2 x 4 but labeled their 4x4's as " 4 x 4 it would lead the average (non carpenter) consumer to believe that the extra " had a meaning, or that it was actually 4 inches by 4 inches, rather than a generic 4 by 4 board (as a 2x4 is labeled).

    I for one think the lawsuit has merit. It's stupid, no doubt. And I have no idea what, if any, actual damages exists. But if HD chose to label the 4x4's differently than their other lumber, the question is why? Was it an accident, that happened in EVERY store over the past X years? Or was it an oversight that happened long ago? Or was it an innocent error that led to deception of some percentage of customers? Who knows.

    But the lawsuit isn't about claiming customers thought they were purchasing actual lumber dimensions when they got normal lumber dimensions on all lumber.
    What possible gain did those named in the lawsuit realize?
    The court should throw that law firm and the lawsuit right out of court. A money grab and nothing more, they should be ashamed.

    You must be a lawyer. Amazing to me that this is what things have come to.

    Maybe the next lawsuit will target pipe and tubing and their ID and OD and how they are labeled according to trade standards.

  16. #15
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Farmington, New Mexico
    Posts
    8,315

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Quote Originally Posted by Specialkayme View Post
    But the lawsuit isn't about claiming customers thought they were purchasing actual lumber dimensions when they got normal lumber dimensions on all lumber.
    The lawsuit is about money, nothing else. Attorneys shaking down the big dogs in the same way the Mafia shakes down the pizza joint to make sure their windows don't all get broken mysteriously.
    Nobody ruins my day without my permission, and I refuse to grant it...

  17. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina
    Posts
    3,406

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Bee View Post
    What were the customers being deceived about?
    I'm not the Plaintiff, so I don't know exactly, but I'll take a stab.

    Keep in mind the "damaged class" aren't home builders, carpenters, or people that regularly buy and use dimensional lumber. The "damaged class" is the average Joe that needed to prop something up by four inches. Or to fill a current hole in something that is four inches. Think of any situation where you needed four inches of lumber. Average Joe walks down the isle looking for wood that will fit into the space he needs, and sees a label that says " 4 x 4 and thinks "that will fit just fine." He buys it, takes it home, and realizes it doesn't quite fit. He has, allegedly, been deceived.

    Now, as far as damages, I find it hard to imagine there is much. Average Joe can just return the board, or use it for something else. There's probably blame on both sides though, as Average Joe should have measured if he actually needed four inches of lumber. But that gets into the merits of the case, not the premise.

    Your carpenter, home builder, or regular purchaser of lumber would know, not based on the labels of the lumber but his own general knowledge, that if he needs to fill a four inch spot with lumber he needs to buy a 6x6 and plane it down (or use multiple other boards). But Average Joe doesn't, and likely relied on the labels HD put out. Or so the theory goes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Digman View Post
    The lawsuit is about money, nothing else.
    The lawyers didn't make up the lawsuit. Someone, somewhere, went to them and complained. The lawyers explained the fees and the risks, and that person chose to go forward with the lawsuit. The attorney didn't walk down the isle of random stores in Illinois looking for false labels, all on his own. If you think they did, you need to subscribe to a conspiracy theory magazine.

    You may not like the lawsuit, and I don't either, but that's the society we live in. America is a very litigious society. But most studies actually show its a more efficient system than a less litigious system. It promotes conflict resolution in an efficient media.

    I find it funny how you slap the word "organic" or "natural" on a honey bottle label and this whole forum goes bananas about truth in labeling, false advertisement claims, and other issues. But when it comes to a lawsuit like this it's considered frivolous. If a lawsuit was filed to claim "natural" honey labeling was misleading when it was physically or chemically altered, I would bet you'd find a thread on a sewing forum saying how ridiculous it was. What might be stupid to you might make the world of difference to someone else.

  18. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    DuPage County, Illinois USA
    Posts
    12,001

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldtimer View Post
    Joking aside, I'd be pretty upset to buy 4x4 and find it's 3 1/2 by 3 1/2. They deserve their punishment.
    All that's required is "out of the box" thinking to keep from being upset.
    Regards, Barry

  19. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Jonestown, Colunbia County,PA
    Posts
    86

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Almost as bad as buying a coffee, spilling it in your lap, then suing because you got scalded.
    A local potato chip manufacturer is being sued because their package contains more 'slack fill' (air) to prevent breakage than another manufacturer's package. They claim it's misleading even though the weight is the same. Don't consumers bother looking at weights and dimensions anymore? How about the container that has a large dimple in the bottom to cut down on product but make the container look larger than it really is?
    Read the label!

  20. #19
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Farmington, New Mexico
    Posts
    8,315

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Again, follow the money. Always follow the money...
    This has nothing to do with justice, or our Constitution, or injury or fraud or anything other than money.
    Nobody ruins my day without my permission, and I refuse to grant it...

  21. #20
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Shreveport, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    2,467

    Default Re: Lumber sizing "deception" lawsuit re Menards and HD

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldtimer View Post
    Joking aside, I'd be pretty upset to buy 4x4 and find it's 3 1/2 by 3 1/2. They deserve their punishment.
    What about a 100x50 framing timber that was actually 90x45?
    David. The way you want to keep bees is most likely at least as good as any way that I could suggest. Probably better.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •