Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
A California judge decided to dismiss a Tinder class action lawsuit that claimed the dating app discriminates against customers based on age and gender, stating that the plaintiff didn’t show how he was harmed by the allegations.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge William F. Highberger gave lead plaintiff Michael Manapol time to amend the Tinder complaint to “connect the dots” to prove harm but when neither party showed up to the court on Wednesday, Highberger tossed the lawsuit.
Manapol filed the Tinder class action lawsuit in April 2015 alleging that the dating app favored women after he found out that a woman was able to get the same service he had for $5 less. The plaintiff claimed that charging different prices based on gender constitutes unlawful discrimination.
The Tinder lawsuit further alleged that women get more match-ups with potential dates than women. “Women receive more favorable swiping terms that men, which is akin to free entrance to Ladies Night,” Manapol states in his complaint.
According to the plaintiff, this practice is “deemed illegal by the California Supreme Court.” Manapol says Tinder violates California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act which prohibits arbitrary discrimination by businesses on the basis of specified classifications, including age and gender.
Tinder disagreed and argued in its demurrer motion last month that the difference in fees does not violate state law. “This is akin to alleging that plaintiff suffered gender discrimination because the entrance fee that he was charged by a nightclub was higher than the fee it charged to a female patron two months earlier,” Tinder states.
In his ruling to dismiss, Judge Highberger agreed with Tinder’s argument stating that “one female’s purchase of Tinder Plus at a lower price” was not enough to show a pattern of price discrimination based on gender.
The original Tinder class action lawsuit also accused the company of bait-and-switch tactics by advertising the dating app as free but then later requiring users to pay for the service.
“In or about March 2015, after rolling out its new forced migration to Tinder Plus, Tinder announced publicly to NPR that it would be charging $9.99 to consumers for these services (at a 50 percent discount), but notably, that any individual who was over 30 years of age would be charged $19.99 for the identical services,” the class action lawsuit claimed.
The Tinder app works by finding potential matches for users by making dating suggestions based on the user’s location. Then the Tinder user can either pass or approve of the potential match. If both Tinder users “like” each other, then Tinder enables the messaging function so they can start communicating.
The plaintiff hoped to represent five different nationwide Classes for those who downloaded Tinder before March 2, 2015.
Manapol is represented by John P. Kristensen and David L. Weisberg of Kristensen Weisberg LLP.
The Tinder Dating App Class Action Lawsuit is Michael Manapol, et al. v. Tinder Inc., et al., Case No. BC589036, in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
