Mattress "was" prices should say when they were last charged

Our view is simple: when a mattress seller shows a crossed-out price next to a sale price, it should also say, in plain words, when that higher price was last actually charged. A "was" price with no date and no definition is a claim the buyer cannot check, and mattresses are exactly the kind of product where buyers cannot check anything else either.

This is not a new argument, but recent court activity has made it harder to wave away. Two settlements over mattress discount advertising are moving through California courts, and both turn on the same question: what does the crossed-out number mean?

What has happened

In the first case, Molloy v. Resident Home LLC, Claim Depot reports that customers who bought from Siena, Nectar, DreamCloud, CloverLane or Awara between 1 March 2021 and 10 April 2026, at a price advertised as a discount from a higher reference price, may claim a $30 voucher. Resident Home LLC agreed to a $665,000 settlement of a class action alleging false or deceptive discounts on its websites. The plaintiff alleged violations of California's Unfair Competition Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act. According to the same report, Resident Home denied all allegations of wrongdoing and settled to avoid the costs and uncertainty of continued litigation. The voucher covers one purchase on the company's sites and is valid for nine months.

In the second, Grossman v. Night US, LLC and Brooklyn Bedding LLC, Class Action U reports an estimated $8.16 million settlement covering leesa.com, brooklynbedding.com, helixsleep.com and bearmattress.com. The plaintiffs alleged that the sites advertised crossed-out original prices and limited-time sales that did not reflect true regular prices, and that this created a false sense of urgency. The defendants strongly deny any wrongdoing and say their promotions complied with the law. Eligible California buyers can claim $110 in cash per qualifying order, or receive a $110 store credit automatically. The parties estimate about 74,000 qualifying orders. OpenClassActions summarises the same terms.

The dates matter for timing. The Resident Home final approval hearing was set for 2 October, and the Night US and Brooklyn Bedding hearing for 16 October. We have not seen a published outcome for either, so readers should check the official settlement websites rather than assume the deals are final.

These are not the only such disputes. Consumer site Mouseprint reported on a California consumer's suit against the retailer Mattress Firm, which alleged that its unlabeled strikethrough prices were rarely, if ever, the price at which items were actually sold. We have not verified how that case ended, and we draw no conclusion about it.

Why the label matters

Notice what is and is not established. None of the allegations above has been proven in court, and the companies in the two settlements have denied wrongdoing or said their practices were lawful. We are not saying any of them misled anyone. Our argument is about the practice, and the practice is visible to any shopper: a mattress is priced against a higher number, and the page gives no way to tell whether that number was ever the real price.

The Mouseprint report points to the core problem. Where a strikethrough price is unlabeled, it says, shoppers may reasonably assume it is the seller's own regular or former price. That is the natural reading of the design. A crossed-out figure looks like history. If it is in fact a list price, a suggested price or a price used in another channel, the buyer would never know unless the seller says so.

The fix is cheap. Next to the crossed-out number, a seller could write one of two things: "Last sold at this price on [date]" or "List price, not a price we have charged." Either is honest. Either lets a buyer decide how much weight to give the discount. Neither stops a seller from running a sale.

The strongest counter-argument

The fair objection is that reference prices are ordinary retail practice, and that the legal picture is not as clear as critics say. Settlements are not findings. The companies deny the claims, and a company can settle a California consumer case purely to avoid litigation cost, as the Resident Home settlement itself describes. A buyer who sees a crossed-out figure beside a lower one may well understand the first figure as a list price, the way car shoppers understand a sticker. And shoppers in a category with dozens of near-identical foam and hybrid beds do use the anchor to compare. A mandatory label, the objection goes, would add friction and could push small sellers to drop discounts that really do save people money.

Part of this is right. A label requirement should not be turned into a ban on list prices, and a discount that is real remains real whatever the page says. If a reference price was genuinely charged, the label costs the seller nothing and arguably helps it, because it makes the deal more believable.

But the objection does not answer the central point. If buyers already understand reference prices as loose list prices, then saying so on the page loses nothing. If they do not, as the lawsuits assume, then the label is exactly what is missing. Either way, the label helps. The only seller for whom a plain definition is a problem is one whose crossed-out price could not be defined honestly.

The remedy is part of the story

There is a second, quieter issue. The remedies on offer differ a great deal. In one case buyers can choose cash. In the other, the claim is a $30 voucher good for nine months on sites the company or its affiliates operate, which means a customer who felt misled is invited to buy again. Whatever the merits of that deal, it shows why prevention beats compensation: a clear label at the time of sale is worth more than a coupon years later. The Resident Home period alone ran from March 2021 to April 2026, more than five years.

What we think should happen

• Sellers should label every crossed-out price as either a price actually charged, with a date, or a list price.
• "Limited time" should come with an end date that holds.
• Comparison sites, including this one, should say when a quoted discount rests on the seller's own reference price.

Buyers can do part of this themselves. If a page gives no date, treat the sale price as the only real number and compare it with other sellers' sale prices, not with the crossed-out figure. If you think you qualify for either settlement, use the official claim sites named in the reports, and speak to a qualified professional if you need advice on your rights.