Dollar General faces a $1 million settlement following allegations of systematic pricing discrepancies affecting checkout accuracy across its vast retail network. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost claimed the discount giant charged customers more at registers than shelf prices indicated, violating consumer protection laws.
With Butler County investigations revealing error rates ranging from 16.7% to 88.2% at 20 tested stores, this became one of Ohio’s most significant retail pricing fraud cases.
What Is Deceptive Pricing?
Unlike traditional shoplifting, where customers steal from stores, deceptive pricing describes retailers taking unauthorized money from customers through pricing discrepancies. Investigators alleged Dollar General systematically charged higher prices at checkout than advertised on shelves, effectively overcharging shoppers.
Ohio law permits only a 2% error rate, yet some stores exceeded 88% pricing errors, suggesting systemic failures rather than random mistakes.
The Lawsuit’s Origins
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost filed legal action on November 1, 2022, after receiving 12 consumer complaints from multiple counties. Butler County Auditor’s Department of Weights and Measures conducted inspections throughout October 2022, testing 20 Dollar General stores and uncovering widespread overcharging.
The lawsuit consolidated findings revealing patterns Yost described as “appalling behavior” requiring court intervention.
Scale of the Problem
The lawsuit targeted Dollar General’s Ohio operations, which included 943 stores statewide as of 2022. County audits suggested that pricing errors occurred at rates ranging from 16.7% to 88.2% of sampled transactions, far exceeding Ohio’s 2% legal tolerance.
Additional complaints came from stores in Cuyahoga, Franklin, Highland, Lucas, Madison, Richland, Summit, and Trumbull counties, indicating widespread issues beyond Butler County.
How Overcharges Occurred
Inspections identified mechanisms behind pricing discrepancies, including outdated shelf labels that did not match register systems, promotional prices displayed but not programmed into scanners, and a general failure to update pricing.
One Franklin County customer reported shampoo marked at $1 on shelves ringing up at $2 at registers. In certain instances, store workers refused to adjust prices when customers pointed out discrepancies.
The $1 Million Settlement
The lawsuit, filed in Butler County Common Pleas Court, initially sought $25,000 civil penalties per violation, unspecified damages for shoppers, and injunctive relief. By October 2023, Dollar General reached a $1 million settlement without admitting wrongdoing.
The agreement directed $750,000 to food banks and hunger-relief organizations across Ohio’s 88 counties, with $250,000 covering penalties and investigative costs.
Key Evidence Presented
Yost’s office presented Butler County audit reports documenting systematic pricing failures across 20 tested stores. Consumer complaints detailed specific instances, including shampoo priced at $1 being charged $2 and stores refusing to correct discrepancies when they were identified.
Follow-up inspections by NBC4 Columbus found items, such as Spaghetti-O’s, marked at $1.50, ringing up at $2.25. The Attorney General cited violations of Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act, including false pricing and bait advertising.
Dollar General’s Pricing Model
Dollar General, a Tennessee-based discount retailer founded in 1939, operated over 18,000 stores nationwide in 2022, making it the largest retailer in America by store count. The company specializes in household essentials for budget-conscious consumers, particularly in rural and underserved communities.
However, operational challenges—including understaffing that left employees unable to update shelf tags while managing other duties—contributed to widespread pricing accuracy failures.
State Regulators Weigh In
Butler County’s weights-and-measures officials conducted systematic inspections, revealing that Dollar General stores consistently failed compliance tests. Franklin County auditors found 8 of 10 Dollar General stores failed inspections in September 2022, with most errors favoring the retailer.
Roger Reynolds, Butler County Auditor, reported that some stores had nearly 88% of items priced incorrectly at checkout. Multiple county auditors created special “failed inspection” stickers to alert consumers to the issue.
Consumer Impact Stories
Individual shoppers described discovering overcharges only after reviewing their receipts at home, finding that items were rang up at higher prices than the marked ones. Low-income families—Dollar General’s core demographic—were disproportionately affected.
One Franklin County customer reported being charged double the shelf price for shampoo; store employees refused corrections. Consumer advocates highlighted how small overcharges accumulate, significantly impacting tight household budgets during inflationary periods.
Dollar General’s Response
Dollar General’s settlement agreement explicitly denied any admission of wrongdoing or liability. A company spokesperson told media outlets that Dollar General “is committed to providing customers with accurate prices” and expressed disappointment when failing this commitment.
The company emphasized that store teams are “empowered to correct the matter on the spot for our customers” and appreciated “the constructive approach to resolving this matter” with Ohio authorities.
Legal Precedents
Ohio previously pursued pricing accuracy enforcement against other retailers, though Dollar General’s case involved exceptionally high error rates. Similar lawsuits targeted major chains like Walmart and Kroger over scanner accuracy, resulting in settlements and corrective measures.
Dollar General also settled with Vermont in 2019, paying $1.75 million for charging higher prices at registers than shelf prices indicated, demonstrating a pattern beyond Ohio.
Industry-Wide Implications
Following Ohio’s lawsuit against Dollar General, Attorney General Yost filed a similar action against Family Dollar (owned by Dollar Tree) in November 2022, alleging identical deceptive pricing practices.
The coordinated enforcement sent warnings through discount retail, where operational pressures and understaffing create vulnerabilities in pricing accuracy. Other states monitored Ohio’s case, with potential for multi-state actions if similar patterns emerged in their jurisdictions.
Settlement Requirements
Beyond monetary payments, the settlement mandated comprehensive operational changes. Dollar General must staff stores sufficiently to keep shelf tags current and accurate. When customers identify pricing discrepancies, clerks must honor shelf prices and correct tags within 24 hours.
District managers must conduct random price checks at least every 45 days. Stores that receive three failed auditor reports within a six-month period must complete full-store price accuracy assessments.
Financial Impact on Dollar General
The $1 million settlement represented a relatively modest financial impact for Dollar General, which generated over $37 billion in annual sales. However, reputational damage and required compliance investments carried greater long-term significance.
The company operates over 20,662 stores across 48 U.S. states and Mexico as of 2025, making systemic operational improvements costly and complex. Additional legal exposure remained if other states pursued similar enforcement actions.
Distribution of Settlement Funds
Ohio Attorney General Yost directed $750,000 to food banks and hunger-relief organizations across all 88 Ohio counties.
Each county auditor selected local beneficiaries, with funds distributed proportionally based on the number of Dollar General stores in each county. For example, Franklin County’s six food banks each received $5,016.48, while Columbiana County divided $14,226.77 among 24 food pantries. The allocation ensured communities most affected by overcharges received assistance.
What Shoppers Should Do
The Ohio Attorney General’s office urged consumers to carefully review their receipts, comparing the charged prices to the shelf labels. Shoppers discovering overcharges should document discrepancies with photos, request immediate refunds, and report patterns to state authorities at OhioProtects.org or 800-282-0515.
Auditors recommend vigilance across all retailers, not just Dollar General. Consumer advocates emphasized that paying with credit cards rather than cash facilitates proving overcharges if disputes arise.
Regulatory Compliance Monitoring
The settlement included ongoing oversight provisions to ensure Dollar General’s compliance with pricing accuracy requirements. County weights-and-measures officials continue conducting routine inspections of Ohio Dollar General locations.
Stores must post signage informing customers of pricing accuracy policies and their right to shelf prices when discrepancies occur. Dollar General employees received mandatory training on proper pricing procedures and customer service obligations as part of the settlement.
Broader Corporate Challenges
The Ohio pricing lawsuit added to Dollar General’s operational struggles, including persistent understaffing complaints that leave single employees managing entire stores. The company has accumulated millions in OSHA fines for workplace safety violations, paying only a fraction of the assessed penalties.
Cluttered stores prompted fire marshal closures in multiple jurisdictions, while rodent issues drew the attention of health departments. Executives acknowledged the need for cleanup efforts, taking $95 million in write-downs on surplus merchandise while deploying “smart teams” to problem locations.
Lasting Impact
The November 2023 settlement concluded Ohio’s legal action and established precedents for enforcing pricing accuracy nationwide. Dollar General’s mandated operational reforms—including staffing improvements, systematic price checks, and consumer notification requirements—created templates other states may adopt.
The case underscored that even small per-transaction overcharges accumulate into significant consumer harm, particularly for vulnerable populations. Future enforcement depends on continued regulatory vigilance and consumer reporting of pricing discrepancies across all retail sectors.
