FloSports, Inc. offers sports broadcasting and streaming services across network sites in the form of “FS subscriptions.” But the complaint for this class action alleges that when consumers sign up for a subscription, they are enrolled in a program that renews their subscriptions every year, automatically charging their credit card, debit card, or other payment means. The complaint alleges that FloSports does this with consumers in California without meeting the requirements of the state’s Automatic Renewal Law (ARL).
The class for this action is all persons in California who, during the applicable statute of limitations period up to and including the date of final judgment in this case, incurred renewal fees for FloSports FS subscriptions.
Subscriptions have become popular recently—at least with businesses, because they allow companies to lock customers in to making regular payments. While subscription businesses are very competitive, with high churn rates, the complaint quotes a McKinsey & Company article as saying that “consumers may lose interest but be too harried to take the extra step of canceling their membership[s].”
For that reason, the complaint quotes the article as saying, “[m]any e-commerce sites work with third-party vendors to implement more manipulative designs.” The complaint alleges these include having “dark patterns” that trick consumers into signing up, not disclosing all the terms of the offer, or making it difficult to cancel subscriptions.
One tactic used by FloSports, the complaint alleges, is offering plans for prices as low as $12.50 a month but not making clear “that this low monthly rate is contingent on signing up for an annual plan, which costs $150 a year.”
California’s ARL was meant to offer basic requirements in the subscription market. In particular, the ARL requires that businesses offering subscriptions to California consumers do certain things:
- They must present the terms of the offer in a clear and conspicuous way before the purchase agreement is made and in visual proximity to the request for consent to the offer.
- They must get the consumers’ affirmative consent before charging their payment methods.
- They must provide an acknowledgement of the automatic renewal offer that contains the terms of the offer, the cancellation policy, and directions for cancelling the subscription that can be retained by the consumer.
The complaint contends that FloSports violates the ARL because it does not do these things and reviews its actual practices in more detail.
Article Type: LawsuitTopic: Consumer
Most Recent Case Event
FloSports FS Subscriptions and California Automatic Renewal Law Complaint
August 29, 2022
FloSports, Inc. offers sports broadcasting and streaming services across network sites in the form of “FS subscriptions.” But the complaint for this class action alleges that when consumers sign up for a subscription, they are enrolled in a program that renews their subscriptions every year, automatically charging their credit card, debit card, or other payment means. The complaint alleges that FloSports does this with consumers in California without meeting the requirements of the state’s Automatic Renewal Law (ARL).
FloSports FS Subscriptions and California Automatic Renewal Law ComplaintCase Event History
FloSports FS Subscriptions and California Automatic Renewal Law Complaint
August 29, 2022
FloSports, Inc. offers sports broadcasting and streaming services across network sites in the form of “FS subscriptions.” But the complaint for this class action alleges that when consumers sign up for a subscription, they are enrolled in a program that renews their subscriptions every year, automatically charging their credit card, debit card, or other payment means. The complaint alleges that FloSports does this with consumers in California without meeting the requirements of the state’s Automatic Renewal Law (ARL).
FloSports FS Subscriptions and California Automatic Renewal Law Complaint