Andersen Windows and its replacement division, Renewal by Andersen, are the subject of active consumer complaints and class action lawsuits covering deceptive “Made in USA” advertising, inflated discount pricing, warranty and installation disputes, and a February 2026 federal recall of roughly 91,000 window opening control devices on 100 Series casement windows. If you own Andersen products or are considering a purchase, several of these matters affect what you should check, what you can claim, and how you can pursue a dispute.
Andersen Windows and Renewal by Andersen Are Not the Same Company
Andersen Corporation runs two channels that consumers routinely confuse, and the distinction shapes who answers when something goes wrong. Andersen Windows manufactures products sold through independent retailers and The Home Depot; it does not sell directly to homeowners or handle installation, which is done by independent “Andersen Certified Contractors.”1Andersen Windows. Difference Between Andersen Windows and Renewal by Andersen
Renewal by Andersen, launched in 1995, is the replacement division. It handles in-home sales, custom manufacturing in Cottage Grove, Minnesota, and installation through local retail locations.2Renewal by Andersen. About Renewal by Andersen In response to BBB complaints, Renewal by Andersen’s corporate office has repeatedly said local “affiliate retailers” hold the consumer contracts and are responsible for scheduling service, while the corporate entity is only the manufacturer.3Better Business Bureau. Renewal by Andersen LLC Complaints If your problem is installation or service, your contract is usually with the local affiliate.
The February 2026 Recall of 100 Series Casement Window Devices
On February 26, 2026, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announced a recall of about 91,000 window opening control devices sold as kits or factory-installed on Andersen 100 Series casement windows manufactured before November 19, 2025. The CPSC found the devices can break or detach after impact, allowing the window to open unexpectedly and creating a fall hazard.4U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Andersen Windows Recalls Window Opening Control Devices The devices were sold between October 2015 and December 2025.5PennLive. Andersen Windows Is Recalling 91,000 Devices
Eight reports of the devices breaking, detaching, or malfunctioning had been filed at the time of the recall, and no injuries were reported. Andersen is offering free in-home repairs by authorized technicians. Consumers are told to keep affected windows closed and locked until the repair is completed.4U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Andersen Windows Recalls Window Opening Control Devices
“Made in USA” Advertising Allegations
On June 30, 2025, the consumer advocacy group Truth in Advertising (TINA.org) filed a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission alleging that Renewal by Andersen’s windows and doors contain imported parts and do not meet the FTC’s “all or virtually all” standard for “Made in USA” claims. TINA.org compiled more than 80 examples of allegedly deceptive claims, including a “Custom Built in the USA” seal used in television commercials, social media, brochures, and direct mail.6Truth in Advertising. Renewal by Andersen’s Made in USA Window Dressing
Some ads carry a disclosure reading “Using U.S. and Imported Parts”; others make no mention of foreign components. A June 2025 flyer reportedly suggested consumers could “avoid import costs” by buying the company’s products.7Yahoo Finance. Renewal by Andersen Reported Making Deceptive Made in USA Claims Under the FTC’s Made in USA Labeling Rule, the agency can seek civil penalties of up to $53,088 per violation.6Truth in Advertising. Renewal by Andersen’s Made in USA Window Dressing TINA.org reported the company has spent more than $400 million on advertising since January 2023.
A class action followed. Alan Dunn sued Renewal by Andersen in Los Angeles County Superior Court on July 14, 2025, alleging unfair competition and false advertising under California law based on “Custom Built in the USA” and “Proudly Made in the US” claims.8Truth in Advertising. Dunn v. Renewal by Andersen Complaint Renewal by Andersen removed the case to federal court in August 2025, and Dunn voluntarily dismissed it without prejudice on September 2, 2025, meaning it can be refiled.9PACER Monitor. Alan Dunn v. Renewal by Andersen LLC et al TINA.org included Renewal by Andersen on its “Most Deceptive Ads of 2025” list.10Truth in Advertising. Renewal by Andersen
The False Discount Class Action
A separate class action targets Renewal by Andersen’s pricing. In May 2024, Brenda Young filed suit in Sacramento County Superior Court alleging the company falsely markets discounts by using artificially inflated reference prices and misrepresenting the limited-time availability of those discounts. The defendants are Renewal by Andersen LLC, Andersen Corporation, and River City Window & Door, Inc.11Truth in Advertising. Young v. Renewal by Andersen Complaint
On January 8, 2026, the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court order that had sent the case back to state court and directed that it proceed in the Eastern District of California, where it is now pending.12CourtListener. Young v. Renewal by Andersen LLC
What Consumers Complain About Most
Renewal by Andersen’s BBB profile shows 193 complaints filed in the most recent three-year period, with 71 closed in the last 12 months. Service and repair issues dominate, accounting for 139 of those complaints. Common grievances include failed or repeated installations, incorrect measurements, mechanical failures with locks and latches, and disputes over warranty work.3Better Business Bureau. Renewal by Andersen LLC Complaints
Warranty disputes recur. Some consumers report being told that warranty repairs would require payment despite believing their windows were still covered. Others describe being bounced between corporate and local affiliates without resolution. A February 2026 complaint described a general manager refusing to complete promised warranty work, prompting the consumer to threaten legal action.3Better Business Bureau. Renewal by Andersen LLC Complaints
Sales tactics are another theme. Consumers at the Kansas City affiliate reported “escalating, time-limited discounts” that a salesperson claimed would expire the moment they left the home, misleading claims about sound reduction, and false representations that products were made entirely in the United States and would qualify for a federal energy tax credit. One consumer alleged the company charges a “600%” markup over what third-party contractors would charge for the same work without disclosing during the sale that subcontractors perform the installation.13Better Business Bureau. Renewal by Andersen of Kansas City Complaints
The Warranty Contains a Class Action Waiver — but You Can Opt Out
Before pursuing legal action on a warranty issue, check the warranty terms. Andersen’s warranty for products manufactured on or after February 9, 2015 includes a dispute resolution process with a class action waiver and a jury trial waiver. Under those terms, consumers agree not to assert or participate in a class action against Andersen, and any individual lawsuit is tried before a judge rather than a jury.14Andersen Windows Help Center. Limited Warranty Dispute Resolution Process Q&A
There is an opt-out. You can submit an opt-out form within one year of purchasing the product to preserve the right to file a class action or demand a jury trial. If you do not opt out and later have a warranty dispute, you must first submit a “Notice of Dispute” form, after which Andersen has 60 days to respond in writing before you can file an individual lawsuit.14Andersen Windows Help Center. Limited Warranty Dispute Resolution Process Q&A
Older Regulatory Actions Worth Knowing
Andersen’s regulatory record has other entries a consumer researching the company may want to weigh. In 2019, the D.C. Attorney General’s office investigated Renewal by Andersen for refusing to provide service in nine Washington, D.C. zip codes, including neighborhoods east of the Anacostia River, based on crime statistics. The company paid a $50,000 fine, agreed to stop excluding parts of the District from its service area, and agreed to train employees on civil rights law compliance and create anti-discrimination policies. It did not admit wrongdoing. The settlement was the first under the “place of residence” provision of the District’s Human Rights Act.15DCist. D.C. Attorney General Sued a Company That Wouldn’t Install Windows East of the River
In 2014, the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs determined that Renewal by Andersen made “unsubstantiated claims” regarding the efficiency of its windows, in violation of city laws.6Truth in Advertising. Renewal by Andersen’s Made in USA Window Dressing
Earlier product defect class actions did not succeed for consumers. In Drobnak v. Andersen Corporation, buyers alleged that Andersen double-paned glass products with capillary tubes and inert gas fill were defective; the district court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, and the Eighth Circuit affirmed the dismissal in April 2009.16FindLaw. Drobnak v. Andersen Corporation In 2011, Troy and Lorie Gratke filed a class action in Minnesota federal court alleging that Andersen 400 Series Tilt Wash vinyl clad windows had a gap in the window seal that allowed moisture to enter, resulting in rotting wood and mold growth.17Woodworking Network. Lawsuit Links Andersen Windows to Mold and Fungus Growth