Tacoma university students forfeited unspent meal funds. Did that break WA laws?
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- University of Puget Sound students bought pre-paid meal plans a.k.a. ‘dining dollars.’
- The funds expired annually. Many students didn’t spend all of their money, a lawsuit says.
- Puget Sound violated state laws by forcing students to forfeit funds, the suit claims.
University of Puget Sound allegedly violated two state laws by requiring students to purchase pre-paid meal plans that expired annually, forcing many students to forfeit unused funds to the school, a lawsuit claims.
The Tacoma-based university’s practice regarding so-called “dining dollars” ran afoul of the Washington Consumer Protection Act and Washington Gift Certificate Law, according to the complaint. The lawsuit was filed by a former student, Katherine Kittlitz, and seeks to be certified as a class-action.
Students must live on campus during their first two academic years at the university and may only change meal plans within the first 10 days of a semester, according to the lawsuit. On-campus meal plans cost between $3,510 and $4,270 during the fall 2025 semester, with most of the price attributed to overhead expenses, the suit said.
The university “knew (or should have known) that it was unreasonable to expect an average student to use all of his or her meal plan(s) and/or Dining Dollars during any given semester,” the complaint said. “Nonetheless, intending to gain a financial windfall, Defendant still sold Plaintiff and every Class member a meal plan(s) that included more Dining Dollars than the average student would consume.”
In response to the complaint, university spokesperson Veronica Craker said that Puget Sound is deeply committed to the support and well-being of its students and to lawfully administering programs, including dining services.
“The university disputes the complaint allegations and will respond through the legal process,” Craker said in a statement on May 29. “Because this matter is pending litigation, the university will not comment further at this time.”
Most universities and colleges require residential students to purchase a meal plan, and “many schools don’t refund unused dining dollars or meal swipes,” according to the suit.
In April, the month before the lawsuit was filed, University of Puget Sound announced that its dining program would change for the 2026-27 school year, shifting to a weekly meal plan. The new approach is consistent with widely used models at residential colleges and universities, according to the university. There was no reference to any issues with leftover funds in its April 17 announcement.
“The new model addresses concerns we have consistently heard from students over time: some students run out of dining dollars before the end of the semester and experience gaps in access to meals,” the university wrote.
Dining dollars are loaded onto a student’s school identification card each semester to buy food in the dining halls. Kittlitz, a Tacoma resident who attended the university between 2021 and 2025, had an undisclosed amount of money left over that she forfeited in 2022, according to the lawsuit filed May 13 in Pierce County Superior Court.
Puget Sound students only were allowed to carry over $25 from fall to spring semesters and gave up all unused funds at the end of each school year, according to the suit.
The complaint alleges that the university was unjustly enriched and violated the state’s Consumer Protection Act by overcharging students and forcing them to forfeit the value of unused and expired meal plans. The suit, which asserts that Puget Sound ID cards loaded with dining dollars are gift cards by legal definition, also claims that the university violated the state’s Gift Certificate Law, which says a gift certificate is valid until it’s either redeemed or replaced.
In January, global law firm Reed Smith noted that lawsuits alleging gift-card act violations over unused meal plan dollars were “a new wave of class actions sweeping higher education.” Such complaints had been filed in multiple states, the firm said.
Two attorneys representing Kittlitz didn’t respond to messages seeking comment.
The lawsuit is seeking for the university to return all funds allegedly acquired illegally or improperly, as well as requesting unspecified damages and legal fees, among other relief.
