Tinder User Seeks Revival of Age Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit

A California Tinder user is appealing a dismissal of his class action claim that the pricing for Tinder Premium discriminates against older users.

Plaintiff Allan Candelore argues Tinder’s tiered pricing for its paid premium services is age discrimination that violates California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. Tinder allegedly charges different prices for this service depending on the user’s age.

Tinder rolled out the set of premium features bundled together as Tinder Plus. Users who pay the premium get unlimited “likes,” and five “Super Likes” per day, and the option to take back erroneous swipes.

Users over the age of 30 are charged $19.99 per month for premium services, while younger users pay only $9.99. Candelore says he has paid full price for Tinder Plus since March 2015.

Calendore filed his Tinder class action lawsuit a few months after Tinder Plus became available. The trial court dismissed Candelore’s claims upon Tinder’s demurrer, without allowing Candelore a chance to amend his complaint.

Following its dismissal, the trial court declined Candelore’s request to reconsider in light of a recent appellate opinion showing that the Unruh Act does apply to age-based pricing tiers.

In oral arguments before the California appeals court, Tinder argued that its pricing strategy is not discriminatory. It would have to be based on arbitrary discrimination or harmful stereotypes to be actionable under the Unruh act, the company said.

Tinder offers a lower price for younger users because they tend to earn less, attorneys for the company said. Attorneys for Tinder also claim the pricing tiers were based solely on testing. Pricing strategies like that have never been found to violate the Unruh Act, the company claimed.

In a separate Tinder class action lawsuit filed in May 2015, Candelore argued Tinder Plus’ pricing also discriminates against Americans. While Tinder users in the U.S. pay up to $19.99 for premium features, users in other countries pay as little as $2.99.

Candelore argues Tinder’s “anti-American” pricing violates the Unruh Act just as much as age-discriminating pricing does. As of January 2016, the Act forbids discrimination on the basis of citizenship, primary language, and immigration status, in addition to many other classifications that were already covered prior to that date.

Because of the price differential between U.S. and non-U.S. users, “a poor, unemployed single mom or dad struggling to get by in California with its high cost of living and looking for a partner, soul mate or spouse must pay much more for Tinder Plus than a millionaire politician, physician or software designer fortunate enough to be a citizen of another country,” the complaint says.

In the age discrimination claim, Candelore is represented by attorneys Kimberly Kralowec and Kathleen Styles Rogers of The Kralowec Law Group, and by Alfred G. Rava of The Rava Law Firm.

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

UPDATE: On Jan. 29, 2018, 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.