Class action claims Brigit used illegal automatic renewals to charge users

Brigit class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Plaintiff Wilfreda Waller filed a class action lawsuit against Bridge It Inc., doing business as Brigit.
• Why: Waller claims Brigit charged consumers recurring subscription fees without proper consent and used deceptive design tactics to prevent users from canceling.
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in Georgia federal court.

Brigit is accused of using unlawful automatic renewal practices and manipulative app design tactics to repeatedly charge financially vulnerable consumers without their knowledge or permission.

Plaintiff Wilfreda Waller alleges Brigit violated state and federal consumer protection laws by enrolling users in paid monthly memberships that automatically renewed without clear disclosure or meaningful consent. 

According to the class action lawsuit, Brigit debits subscription fees directly from users’ bank or credit union accounts and continues charging them until they successfully cancel, a process the lawsuit claims is intentionally confusing and difficult.

Brigit operates a personal finance mobile app that markets short-term cash advances to consumers living paycheck to paycheck. 

While Brigit advertises that users can cancel memberships “anytime,” Waller claims the company conceals critical cancellation terms and uses interface designs that discourage or delay cancellation. 

The class action lawsuit describes these tactics as “dark patterns,” a term used to describe user interface designs that manipulate consumers into taking actions they would not otherwise choose.

Waller claims her credit union account was charged multiple times in December 2024 and January 2025 without her awareness. Several of the charges allegedly triggered insufficient funds fees of $35 per transaction, ultimately leading her credit union to close her account. 

The plaintiff explains she did not discover the charges until reviewing her bank statements and says she never affirmatively agreed to repeated automatic renewals.

Brigit allegedly used deceptive design to trap users in subscriptions

The class action lawsuit alleges Brigit’s cancellation process violates automatic renewal laws by failing to provide clear, conspicuous disclosures and by burying cancellation information within the app. 

Waller claims Brigit intentionally deemphasizes cancellation options while emphasizing enrollment, making it unlikely that reasonable consumers can easily stop recurring charges.

The lawsuit also references prior regulatory scrutiny of Brigit, including enforcement actions related to similar subscription and marketing practices. Waller alleges that despite those actions, Brigit continued to engage in the same conduct that allegedly prevented consumers from canceling and resulted in unauthorized charges.

Waller seeks to represent a nationwide class of consumers who were charged Brigit subscription fees through automatic renewals as well as a Georgia subclass of users charged while residing in the state. 

She asserts claims for violations of automatic renewal laws, consumer protection statutes and unjust enrichment. The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief, restitution, damages, attorneys’ fees and a jury trial.

Similarly, Surfshark was hit with a class action lawsuit alleging it unlawfully charged California consumers via automatic subscription renewals.

What do you think of the claims made in this Brigit class action lawsuit? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Harper T. Segui, Erin J. Ruben, Thomas Pacheco and Kathryn Anne B. Robinson of Lee Segui PLLC and Michael R. Reese of Reese LLP.

The Brigit class action lawsuit is Waller v. Bridge It Inc. d/b/a Brigit, Case No. 1:26-cv-00206-ELR, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• M&M candies recalled across 20 states over multiple allergen concerns
• SoundCloud data breach lawsuit alleges 29.8M accounts compromised
• Sysco sued over alleged unlawful tobacco surcharge in employee health plans
• Delaware Zantac cancer lawsuit tossed, judge says claims time-barred