Renewal by Andersen is facing a federal class action lawsuit after an Indiana consumer alleged the company engaged in an illegal campaign of unsolicited telemarketing calls and promotional text messages.
The lawsuit, Perish v. Renewal by Andersen LLC, was filed Sept. 10, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division. The complaint accuses Bayport, Minnesota-based Renewal by Andersen LLC of repeatedly contacting consumers whose telephone numbers are listed on the National Do Not Call Registry, ignoring explicit opt-out demands and violating federal restrictions on calling times. It parallels the 2024 Massarello v. Power Home Remodeling Group, LLC court case out of Michigan, which is still ongoing.
For door and window dealers and contractors, the case highlights the potential legal and financial exposure associated with direct-to-consumer sales—most notably outbound call centers and text marketing campaigns.
Outbound calling lists must be scrubbed against the National Do Not Call Registry at least once every 31 days, with records documenting the process maintained.
Call center representatives and automated dialers must process verbal stop requests immediately.
Outbound calling systems also must enforce calling windows between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. in the recipient’s local time.
Door and window brands also remain legally responsible for telemarketing calls and text broadcasts conducted by external marketing agencies or lead sellers acting on their behalf.
The plaintiff, Deric Perish of Valparaiso, Indiana, claims he began receiving persistent, unsolicited telemarketing calls from Renewal by Andersen on his personal cellphone in June 2026. According to Perish, he had registered his cellphone number on the National Do Not Call Registry in January 2021 and had no prior business relationship or transaction history with the company, the complaint says. He received at least 10 telemarketing calls between June 21 and June 28, 2026, according to court records. On several occasions, Perish answered the calls and verbally instructed representatives to stop calling. The complaint alleges that instead of placing him on an internal do-not-call list, callers hung up and the telemarketing calls continued.
The filing also alleges a violation involving the timing of one call. On June 26, 2026, Renewal by Andersen allegedly placed a telemarketing call to Perish at 7:31 a.m. Federal Communications Commission regulations prohibit telemarketing solicitations before 8 a.m. local time.
In addition to phone calls, the complaint alleges Renewal by Andersen sent Perish promotional text messages. Court records include a promotional text sent Aug. 6, 2026, advertising a “31-Day Sale” offering $325 off every window, $879 off every door and free glass upgrades.
According to Perish, before filing the lawsuit, he sent a formal pre-suit demand letter by certified mail to Renewal by Andersen’s corporate headquarters in Cottage Grove, Minnesota, on June 29, 2026. The letter detailed the alleged call logs, cited alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and federal Do Not Call regulations, and requested $13,500 to settle the matter out of court. Perish also sought written assurance that the calls would stop and that all call records would be preserved.
The demand letter established a July 29, 2026, settlement deadline. After Renewal by Andersen failed to resolve the claim or cure the alleged statutory violations, Perish filed the class action complaint in federal court. A summons was issued Sept. 11, 2026, and formal personal service was completed on Renewal by Andersen’s registered agent Sept. 14, 2026.
The lawsuit asserts two primary legal counts.
Count I alleges violations of the federal TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227, and 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(c) for placing multiple solicitation calls to numbers listed on the National Do Not Call Registry without prior express written permission. Under federal law, statutory damages are $500 per violation, with courts authorized to award up to $1,500 per call in treble damages for knowing or willful violations.
Count II asserts claims under the Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act (IDCSA), Ind. Code § 24-5-0.5-3, which categorizes TCPA violations committed by commercial suppliers as deceptive sales practices. Indiana law allows consumers to seek statutory damages of $500 per act, up to $1,000 or triple actual damages for willful violations, as well as attorney’s fees.
The complaint seeks certification of two proposed classes.
The proposed Nationwide TCPA Class includes all individuals in the U.S. listed on the National Do Not Call Registry who received two or more solicitation calls from or on behalf of Renewal by Andersen within a 12-month period during the past four years.
The filing estimates total damages for the class as a whole will exceed $5 million.
Renewal by Andersen has 21 days from the date of service to file its answer or responsive motion with the district court.