Bumble Class Action Says Dating App Violates Auto Renewal Law

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 group of Californians have filed a Bumble class action lawsuit alleging that the dating app violates state auto renewal and dating service laws.

The plaintiffs claim in their class action lawsuit that, while looking for love, they decided to sign up for the premium service Bumble Boost.

However, the companies that run the app, Bumble Trading Inc. and Bumble Holding Ltd., allegedly fail to inform users of important rights in its terms of service, which violates California’s dating service contract law.

Each of the plaintiffs claim that they signed up for a subscription to the premium service, Bumble Boost, for a fee ranging from $8.99 to $139.99 depending on the length of the subscription period, one week to six months.

“The Terms do not inform consumers of their right to cancel the contract, without penalty or obligation, within three business days, as required under California’s dating service contract law,” the Bumble auto renew class action lawsuit states.

Further, alleges the Bumble dating app class action lawsuit, Bumble repeatedly fails to properly refund customers.

Bumble’s terms of service and related FAQs indicate that premium subscriptions are non-refundable – nullifying their contract with consumers, according to the plaintiffs.

The Bumble class action lawsuit states that the dating app also automatically renews premium subscriptions, yet another violation of California law.

“Bumble has a uniform policy and practice of automatically renewing consumers’ premium subscriptions without obtaining affirmative consent prior to the consumer’s purchase, without providing the auto-renewal terms in a clear and conspicuous manner prior to the purchase, and without providing an acknowledgement identifying an easy and efficient mechanism for consumers to cancel their subscriptions,” contends the Bumble dating class action lawsuit.

Additionally, Bumble users who wish to cancel their premium subscription have found it “exceedingly difficult and confusing” to do so, alleges the Bumble class action lawsuit.

“In fact, Bumble does not provide consumers with an acknowledgement that identifies a toll-free telephone number, electronic mail address, or postal address, or another cost-effective, timely, and easy-to-use mechanism for cancellation, in violation of [California business law],” the Bumble class action lawsuit states.

The plaintiffs say that they and other putative Class Members were denied their right to a cancellation and refund under California law.

“Other comparable dating app services, such as Tinder, Match, and others inform California residents of their right to cancel their subscription, without penalty or obligation, at any time prior to midnight of the third business day following the date they subscribed,” notes the Bumble auto renew class action lawsuit.

The Bumble app class action lawsuit seeks to represent other Californians who signed up for Bumble Boost.

This is not the first class action lawsuit to ding Bumble. In September, a class action was filed over the dating app’s auto renewal policy in New York.

The Bumble auto renewal class action lawsuit is seeking restitution, along with damages, as well as a court order forcing the dating app to modify its allegedly illegal policies regarding cancellation and automatic renewal of its premium services.

The lead plaintiffs, Nick King, Jr., Deena Fischer, and Elena Weinberger, are represented by David C. Parisi and Suzanne Havens Beckman of Parisi & Havens LLP, and Grace E. Parasmo and Yitzchak H. Lieberman of Parasmo Lieberman Law.

The Bumble Auto Renewal Class Action Lawsuit is King, et al. v. Bumble Trading Inc., et al., Case No. 5:18-cv-06868-NC, in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.