NFL+ Subscription Deceptive and Difficult to Cancel Class Action

NFL Enterprises, LLC has gotten into the subscription market with its new NFL+ Premium (or NFL Plus). But the complaint for this class action alleges that the NFL has engaged in deceptive practices with this subscription program, including autoconverting subscribers from an earlier program, making cancellation difficult, charging consumers after they have canceled, and providing inadequate customer communications.

Two classes have been propsed for this action:

• The Florida and New York Class is all persons in Florida and New York who subscribed to NFL+ during the applicable statute of limitations.
• The Consumer Fraud Multi-State Class is all persons in Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Alaska, Arkansas, Wyoming, West Virginia, and Utah who subscribed to NFL+ during the applicable statute of limitations.

Subscriptions are a lucrative format for businesses because, as the complaint notes, subscribers are retained and continue paying until they take action to opt out of the subscription. The NFL+ subscription provides streaming of National Football League game radio and television broadcasts and other content from NFL Films and the NFL Network.

According to the complaint, NFL+ got many of its earliest subscribers in a deceptive way, by coopting subscribers from an earlier program: “In July 2022, [NFL Enterprises] autoconverted and autorenewed GamePass subscribers … to a different, new service, known as NFL+, without their clear knowledge or consent and charged them a year’s membership all at once.” The plaintiff for this class action, Ryan Oyler, was one such subscriber.

The complaint alleges that the company uses “dark patterns” to make it difficult for subscribers to cancel: “The result is that [NFL Enterprises] can scientifically ensure that no more than a fixed percentage of users will successfully navigate the gauntlet of obstacles laid down in front of them…”

When Oyler went to cancel, he found no clear and obvious pathway to doing so. He found a link marked “cancellation,” but the complaint alleges that it “pulled up instructions that were unclear and non-intuitive such that [he] could not adequately navigate and complete the process.”

He then “removed the subscription and payment information from his account, before deleting it entirely.” No confirmation email was sent to him. However, the company still managed to charge him for the subscription, even though he now had no way to access the services offered because he had deleted his account.

Oyler then tried to complete the cancellation process by telephone, but the representative told him she could not help him. Subsequently, Oyler used the chatbot or email response options, but the automated responders only answered him after long intervals and did not appear to understand what he was saying.

The complaint alleges that the point of these delayed and inadequate responses “is to cause customers to ‘give up’ out of frustration and eventually cease their attempts at cancellation and getting their money back.”

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer
Tags: Automatic Subscription Renewal or Continuous Service Agreement, Cancellation, Difficult to Cancel, Failure to Cancel When Requested, Unfair Subscription Practices