A lawsuit filed in Summit County court earlier this week questions the legality of a resort surcharge imposed on purchases at Copper Mountain.

The class action lawsuit filed Monday, May 12, by Gary Chaney, on behalf of himself and other Copper Mountain customers, names POWDR, which owns Copper Mountain Resort, and the resort itself as defendants in the case.

“POWDR has a practice of advertising goods and services at prices lower than what it charges at the register,” the complaint filed in the case states. “When the customer goes to pay, POWDR charges up to 9% more than the price advertised, plus 6.375% in tax. This practice is deceptive and unlawful.”

The lawsuit, which seeks monetary damages and asks the court to order Copper Mountain Resort to end what it calls “deceptive trade practices,” claims that the resort engaged in a breach of contract with Chaney and violated the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, impacting more than 10,000 people.

POWDR vice president of communications Stacey Hutchinson in a statement denied that Copper Mountain was engaging in unlawful practices.

“We are aware of the suit against Copper and are reviewing it with our legal council,” Hutchinson said. “We firmly believe that this lawsuit is entirely baseless.”

The complaint includes photos of Copper Mountain’s menus, which it states do not disclose the surcharge, and of receipts, which the lawsuit claims were usually only provided upon request, showing the surcharge costs on top of the listed price. In most instances, the surcharge is listed as 7%, but the complaint also includes an instance during the spring break season in March when the surcharge was listed on a receipt as 9%. Spring break is one of the busiest times of year for Colorado ski resorts.

In one example, a burger listed on the menu at the Aerie Food Court for $20 cost an additional $1.40 due to the resort surcharge. In another example, the complaint states that Downhill Dukes — an outdoor bar and restaurant in Copper’s Center Village — does not list the surcharge on its menu, but that the surcharge added an additional $1.19 on top of the listed $17 cost for large pretzel bites.

The complaint claims that POWDR is engaging in “deceptive trade practices” by advertising goods while intending not to sell them as advertised and making false statements about the prices of items. The complaint states that the surcharge “induces consumers into purchasing goods and services by falsely advertising goods and services at lower prices than what is charged at the register.”

“Unlike Summit County and/or Colorado State Sale Tax, the Copper Mountain Resort Surcharge is not a government-mandated tax, nor is it a government imposed fee,” the complaint states. “… The Copper Mountain Resort Surcharge is an additional revenue source POWDR uses to support its business operations and satisfy its private contractual obligations with affiliated entities and business partners.”