Canadians who believed they had won a boat in the Tim Hortons’ Roll Up to Win contest may see their claims addressed soon, as a proposed class action lawsuit is under consideration. Initiated by the Montreal law firm LPC Avocats last year, the lawsuit seeks to compel Tim Hortons to fulfill what they communicated as won prizes. An authorization hearing is scheduled to determine if the class action can move forward, following an incident where several customers received incorrect notifications regarding winning a fishing boat valued at $55,000.
The debacle began when, after the annual contest, customers using the Tim Hortons app received emails detailing their contest winnings. For some, the emails mistakenly indicated a prize of a boat and trailer. This error was acknowledged by Tim Hortons, with a spokesperson attributing it to “human error.” Michael Oliveira, the company’s director of communications, stated that the mishap stemmed from an attempt to provide customers with a fun summary of their participation in the contest.
Following the inaccuracies, LPC Avocats filed the lawsuit seeking not just the delivery of the boats, but also damages to be determined, alongside punitive damages of $10,000 for each affected class member. Founding attorney Joey Zukran stressed the significance of specific performance, emphasizing that the court order should compel Tim Hortons to provide the promised boats to those misled by the emails. Zukran noted that this was not an isolated incident, citing a similar case in 2023 where customers were mistakenly informed about winning a $10,000 gift card.
Despite the ongoing situation, Tim Hortons maintains that the lawsuit lacks merit and plans to address the matter through the judicial system. LPC Avocats’ clients primarily seek the fulfillment of their supposed winnings rather than financial compensation, highlighting the expectation set by the company’s communication. The upcoming hearing will play a critical role in determining how the matter is resolved in the court of law.
This legal challenge underscores the importance of clear and accurate communication, particularly when dealing with promotional contests that create substantial customer expectations. It raises broader questions about accountability for corporations when errors in communication lead to customer disappointment and potential legal repercussions. As courts increasingly navigate the complexities of consumer rights and corporate obligations, outcomes from this case may set precedents for similar future disputes.
Overall, the situation reflects ongoing concerns about consumer trust in major brands and the implications of marketing blunders. As the authorization hearing looms, both parties are preparing to present their cases, indicating a significant legal battle ahead with potential ramifications for Tim Hortons and its reputation as a customer-centric brand.
