Tinder Plus Age Discrimination Class Action Revived by Appeals Court

Earlier this week, a California appeals court reversed a lower court’s ruling dismissing a class action lawsuit accusing Tinder Inc. of charging older users of the dating app a higher price to access Tinder Plus.

Tinder owns and operates a dating app that presents users with photos of potential dates. Users can swipe right on a tablet or smartphone to show approval or swipe left to show disapproval.

Although the service started as a free app, a premium service called “Tinder Plus” was released in March 2015 and allowed users to pay a monthly fee to access additional features.

Plaintiff Allan Candelore challenged Tinder’s practice of charging consumers who are 30 or older $19.99 per month to use Tinder Plus but charging those under the age of 30 only $9.99 or $14.99 to use the service.

The Tinder Plus class action lawsuit asserted claims for age discrimination under the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the Unfair Competition Law.

The trial court dismissed the Tinder age discrimination class action lawsuit without leave to amend. Candelore subsequently appealed the lower court’s decision and sought to have the case revived.

Tinder argued that its practice of charging people over the age of 30 a higher price was justified because its market research shows that older consumers are more willing to spend money on the service.

However, the appeals court did not agree with Tinder’s assertion, finding that the practice of charging older users a higher price violates California’s ‘broad protection’ against age discrimination, and this discriminatory pricing does not seem to have a public-interest justification.

Writing for the appellate panel, Judge Brian S. Currey noted that “some individuals will not fit the mold” with respect to Tinder’s market research findings that younger users are less likely to pay for the service.

“Some older consumers will be ‘more budget constrained’ and less willing to pay than some in the younger group,” the judge wrote.

The court found that Tinder was not prohibited from using a tiered pricing structure, but warned that the distinctions must not be applied in a discriminatory manner, such as by a person’s age. The court also noted it was possible that a lower court could determine that there was some sort of public interest justification for Tinder’s tiered pricing.

“Because nothing in the complaint suggests there is a strong public policy that justifies the alleged discriminatory pricing, the trial court erred” when it dismissed the Tinder Plus class action lawsuit, Judge Currey wrote.

“Accordingly, we swipe left, and reverse.”

The Tinder Plus class action lawsuit will be sent back to the trial court for further proceedings.

Candelore is represented by Kimberly A. Karalowec and Kathleen Styles Rogers of The Kralowec Law Group and Alfred G. Rava of The Rava Law Firm.

The Tinder Plus Age Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit is Allan Candelore v. Tinder Inc., Case No. B270172, in the Court of Appeal of the State of California, Second Appellate District.