Homeaglow to pay $2.25M over alleged deceptive Dazzling Cleaning subscription tactics

Homeaglow lawsuit overview:

• Who: Homeaglow, doing business as Dazzling Cleaning, agreed to pay $2.25 million to resolve claims brought by the Washington State Attorney General’s Office.
• Why: The state claims Homeaglow deceptively enrolled consumers into recurring memberships with hidden fees and cancellation penalties.
• Where: The case was filed in Washington state court.

Homeaglow agreed to pay $2.25 million to resolve allegations that it deceptively enrolled consumers into recurring cleaning service memberships that included hidden fees and costly cancellation penalties.

According to the Washington State Attorney General’s Office, Homeaglow advertised three hours of house cleaning for $19 but allegedly failed to clearly disclose that customers would automatically be enrolled in a recurring $59-per-month membership program called ForeverClean.

The Homeaglow lawsuit claims consumers reasonably believed they were purchasing a one-time discounted cleaning service, not signing up for a six-month subscription plan.

“Reasonable consumers are left with the impression that — at most — they are committing to paying $19 for three hours of cleaning,” the complaint states.

The state alleges Homeaglow also failed to adequately disclose additional transaction fees ranging from 5% to 15% for each cleaning appointment.

According to the complaint, consumers who attempted to cancel their memberships before six months allegedly faced “early termination fees,” requiring them to pay the difference between the discounted promotional cleaning and the company’s standard rates.

The attorney general’s office alleged some consumers ended up paying hundreds of dollars in membership dues and fees despite believing they had only purchased a low-cost introductory cleaning.

Homeaglow allegedly inflated review ratings

The Homeaglow lawsuit also accused the company of misleading consumers through allegedly inflated customer review ratings. According to the complaint, the company suppressed negative reviews on its website while advertising a 4.8-star average rating.

The state further alleged Homeaglow ran advertisements claiming it had an “excellent” five-star Trustpilot rating despite Trustpilot allegedly showing a significantly lower rating and notifying the company about suspicious or fabricated reviews.

The Better Business Bureau reportedly received more than 3,300 complaints about Homeaglow over a three-year period and assigned the company an “F” rating.

Under the settlement agreement, Homeaglow must modify its advertising and subscription practices, including clearly disclosing membership terms and making cancellation processes easier for consumers.

The agreement also prohibits Homeaglow from charging early termination fees to existing customers and requires the company to notify current members that they may cancel their subscriptions.

Last year, a consumer sued Homeaglow, alleging it violated Washington’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by making unsolicited robocalls to consumers.

What do you think about these allegations against Homeaglow? Let us know in the comments.

Washington is represented by Bret Finkelstein, Daniel Allen and Zorba Leslie of the Washington State Office of the Attorney General.

The Homeaglow lawsuit is State of Washington v. Homeaglow Inc., et al., Case No. 26-2-15488-1, in the King County Superior Court.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Ford recalls over 140K Rangers due to potential fire hazard linked to sun visor wiring
• Giant Eagle pita chips recalled across five states over Salmonella concerns
• Eyemart Express sued over alleged failure to safeguard patient information in data breach
• The Farmer’s Dog sued over alleged excessive fat levels in dog food