24 Hour Fitness Class Action Says Members Steamed Over ‘Improper’ Fees

A California gym member is suing 24 Hour Fitness USA for continuing to charge monthly fees despite locking its doors in response to the coronavirus pandemic.

Plaintiff Jessica Williams says she pays $42.55 a month for membership at her local 24 Hour Fitness center.

On March 16, the company closed all of its gyms nationwide — approximately 430 total ­— because of the coronavirus threat. And yet, the 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit alleges, the company charged Williams’ card March 27 as usual for its monthly fee.

If you were charged for a service or event that was canceled or changed because of the coronavirus, click here to participate in an investigation.

She wasn’t the only one. The 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit states that many members of 24 Hour gyms complained about unfair charges after the gyms were closed.

To date, the company has failed to fully reimburse Williams or other members for fees paid since the closure, the 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit maintains.

A $20 credit from the company later appeared on Williams’ bank statement and those of other members, but no explanation was reportedly given.

“It is not certain … that this credit was related to membership fees or if it was a credit for some other unknown, unspecified, and improper charge,” states the 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit.

“By crediting back less than, or none of, the full amount that Defendant took from Plaintiff and the Class, Defendant was able to keep for itself tens of millions of dollars.”

Then, on April 1, CEO Tony Ueber posted an online letter to members saying the company would suspend billings for membership, services and other fees as of April 16 if clubs had not yet reopened, the 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit reports.

The letter also stated: “For the membership billings that were charged from March 17 through April 15, members will receive additional days of access equal to the number of days paid for while the clubs were closed in your area. The extension will apply at the end of the membership. If you have a pre-paid membership, your end date will be extended to cover the amount of time the clubs are closed in your area,” according to the 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit.

However, 24 Hour’s actions contradict its membership agreement, which the 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit quotes: “If Unforeseen Events force your club of enrollment to close for more than 30 consecutive days, then 24 Hour will extend your membership, without dues, for the same period your club of enrollment was closed or completely unavailable.”

The 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit maintains the company should return every penny it charged during the time the gyms were closed. “Defendant is violating its contract by refusing to return all of the dues it charged while its gyms were closed and by instead offering terms to which Plaintiff and the Class did not agree.”

The company’s membership contract also includes an arbitration provision with a waiver of class action and jury rights. However, the 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit argues that the plaintiff’s dispute qualifies as a “small claim,” which is expressly excluded from that provision in the contract.

“Defendant improperly charged Plaintiff either approximately $40 or $20 (if the $20 credit was a refund of a portion of the improper charge), both of which are below the jurisdictional maximum of a small claim and fit within the agreement’s exclusion for small claims and its authorization to file claims like these in this District,” states the 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit.

The 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit claims unjust enrichment, money-had-and-received, conversion, breach of contract and violations of several California laws including the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law.

The 24 Hour class action lawsuit also cites violations of the Health Studio Services Contract Law, which states in part that “any contract for heath studio services entered into in reliance upon any willful and false, fraudulent, or misleading information, representation, notice or advertisement of the seller shall be void and unenforceable.”

In this case, “Plaintiff and Class members signed up and paid for Defendant’s gym membership based on Defendant’s false and misleading representation that Plaintiff and the Class would have access to Defendant’s gyms 24 hours per day, when, in fact, Defendant unilaterally charged them membership fees after Defendant closed all of its gyms,” according to the 24 Hour Fitness class action lawsuit.

“Accordingly, the membership contracts are void and Defendant must refund all of the membership fees charged while its gyms were and remain closed.”

A similar 24 Hour Fitness failure to refund class action has been filed by another California consumer.

Williams is demanding a jury trial, seeking restitution, court costs, compensatory and punitive damages, and injunctive relief.

She is represented by Daniel Keller, Stephen M. Fishback and Dan C. Bolton of Keller Fishback & Jackson LLP; and Stephen J. Fearon Jr. of Squitieri & Fearon LLP.

The 24 Hour Fitness Failure To Refund Class Action Lawsuit is Jessica Williams, et al. v. 24 Hour Fitness USA Inc., Case No. 4:20-cv-03096-DMR, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Join a Free Coronavirus Failure to Refund Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you are still being charged for a flight, event or service even though it was canceled due to the 2019 Novel Coronavirus public health emergency, you may be entitled to compensation.

Join Here

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Cathay Pacific Class Action Says Airline Denied COVID-19 Refunds

What’s Covered Under Minnesota Lemon Law?

Planet Fitness Class Action Says Members Charged Regardless of COVID-19

Can You Have a Seizure from Juuling?