KitchenAid / Whirlpool Corporation
Even a premium household brand isn't safe. KitchenAid got sued in 2023.
KitchenAid is owned by Whirlpool, a Fortune 500 company. Despite that backing, the brand's e-commerce site faced a class action in 2023 alleging blind shoppers couldn't browse appliances, read product details, or check specs because of screen-reader incompatibility and missing image descriptions.
The case demonstrates a now-familiar pattern: plaintiff firms target known consumer brands where the website is the primary sales channel. The dollar amount the brand can spend on legal fees is much higher than the cost of just making the site accessible — but only if they do it before being sued.
Court
Not confirmed — reported as U.S. federal court, 2023
Case
Unknown Plaintiff v. KitchenAid (Whirlpool Corporation)
Not confirmed — verify via PACER before publication
Outcome
Status unknown — class action filed 2023
What went wrong on the site
Each visual below shows what visitors with disabilities actually experienced.
<div onClick="buy()">
<div>Buy now</div>
</div>
Custom controls had no ARIA roles, so screen readers could not announce what they were or what state they were in.
WCAG 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value
Screen reader announces:
"Image. Image. Image."
Product images and key visuals had no alt text — screen readers announced 'image' or the file name instead of describing what users were looking at.
WCAG 1.1.1 Non-text Content
Sources & documentation
Is your site exposed like KitchenAid's was?
Run a free scan to find out which of these violations exist on your site right now.
Scan my siteAll Retail cases
See the full retail risk landscape
Other cases, top WCAG failures for retail, and what to fix first.
More B2C cases
Retail / E-commerce
Target Corporation
First major e-commerce ADA settlement in U.S. history; established that commercial websites are covered by ADA and class-action exposure is real — Target paid $6M+ in 2008.
Retail / E-commerce
Fashion Nova
Largest disclosed ADA web accessibility class settlement in recent years at $5.15M — and the DOJ intervened in 2026 to argue even this wasn't enough, signaling elevated federal scrutiny.
Streaming
Netflix
Established that the ADA applies to web-only businesses with no physical stores; Netflix paid $795k in fees/monitoring and committed to 100% captioning of its entire streaming library.