Olly class action claims supplement brand sneaks junk fees into shopping carts

Olly junk fees class action overview:

• Who: A customer filed a class action lawsuit against Unilever United States.
• Why: The plaintiff claims Unilever sneakily adds junk fees to consumers’ shopping carts on Olly.com.
• Where: The Olly junk fees class action was filed in California federal court.

A new class action lawsuit alleges Unilever United States sneakily adds junk fees to consumers’ shopping carts on Olly.com.

Plaintiff Amanda Poore filed the Olly class action lawsuit against Unilever United States on May 19 in California federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws.

According to the lawsuit, Unilever, the owner of the Olly brand, has been deceiving consumers by adding hidden junk fees to their shopping carts on the Olly website.

Poore claims that the brand, which specializes in vitamins and supplements, advertises free or flat-rate shipping for orders over $49 but surreptitiously adds an “Order Protection” fee during the checkout process.

The lawsuit alleges that the fees are deceptive and unfair, as they are sneaked into consumers’ shopping carts without their knowledge or consent.

The fees are described as “Order Protection,” but Poore argues that they provide no added value to consumers and are essentially an additional shipping cost, rendering the promise of free or flat-rate shipping false.

Olly website’s checkout process ‘intentionally designed to go unnoticed,’ lawsuit says

Poore claims that the Olly website’s checkout process is intentionally designed to go unnoticed by consumers. The lawsuit alleges that the fee is added in small print, with an optional hyperlink to “Continue Without Checkout+” barely visible, making it difficult for consumers to opt out.

As a result, many consumers are unaware that the fee has been added or believe it is mandatory, the lawsuit states.

The lawsuit further alleges that Unilever’s practice of adding these junk fees gives the company an unfair advantage over competitors who fairly disclose their shipping charges.

Poore claims that the deceptive fees are designed to increase profitability by misrepresenting the true shipping costs to consumers.

The complaint cites a recent media report highlighting the problem of hidden fees in online shopping, noting that some brands automatically add optional coverage to orders, making the fees appear mandatory.

Poore’s lawsuit seeks to represent all consumers who paid an “Order Protection” fee or similar fee for a purchase from Olly. She is seeking certification of the Olly class action lawsuit, damages, fees, costs and a jury trial.

Meanwhile, True Classic Tees is also facing a class action over a “package protection & sustainability fee” where the optional hyperlink to “remove” the fee is likewise intentionally designed to go unnoticed.

What do you think of the allegations in this Olly junk fees class action lawsuit? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Jeffrey D. Kaliel, Sophia G. Gold and Amanda J. Rosenberg of KalielGold PLLC.

The Olly junk fees class action is Poore v. Unilever United States, Case No. 4:25-cv-04294-JST, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Zicam and Orajel swabs recalled over contamination concerns
• Frito-Lay class action alleges SunChips falsely advertised as 100% whole grain
• Class action claims Ritual Zero Proof adds ‘junk fees’ to online orders
• Class action claims BofA pocketed interest meant for Calif. EDD debit card recipients