StubHub’s $3 Beyoncé ticket surcharge blasted in ‘junk fee’ class action lawsuit

The deceptive practice costs US families tens of billions a year, the suit claims

StubHub’s $3 Beyoncé ticket surcharge blasted in ‘junk fee’ class action lawsuit

StubHub Inc. systematically slips in a $3 charge for Beyoncé and other hot concerts at the very end of a dizzying checkout process, according to a lawsuit that accuses it of fueling a “junk fee” epidemic.

The ticket resale site is engaging in a deceptive practice so egregious that even the White House has blasted it as costing US families tens of billions of dollars a year, according to the proposed class action suit, filed late Wednesday in federal court in San Francisco. 

The two customers bringing the suit say StubHub consistently underestimates fees for tickets that cost $20 or more by $3 per purchase and by $2 to $3 for lower-priced offerings. They ran more than 100 “experiments” on StubHub, and the fees were incorrectly calculated each time “like clockwork,” they claim.

They say the “bait and switch is made even more deceptive by the fact that the price increases only at the final checkout screen, after the customer is put on a prominently displayed 10-minute shot clock to review over a half dozen cluttered screens,” including “numerous exhortations like ‘Great news! You’ll be seated together’” — which customers would already know.

StubHub didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment on the suit.

Ticketing companies have faced a barrage of criticism from consumers who have complained that the full price of tickets is often far more than initially advertised. A study by the Government Accountability Office showed that extra fees add an average of 27% to primary ticket sales and 31% to tickets purchased on secondary markets. 

According to the suit against StubHub, one of the two customers bought tickets to The Weeknd in August, while the other bought a ticket to the When We Were Young Festival in May. They say they tried to buy tickets for an August Beyoncé show in Santa Clara, California, for $512 each, which StubHub said included fees. But after they had clicked through nine pages and pop-ups, the price had gone up to $515 apiece. 

The suit comes after President Joe Biden in October announced a rule that would require businesses, including ticket sellers, to show consumers the full price of goods and services up front, calling it “the most comprehensive action” his administration has taken on hidden or confusing charges. 

The proposed Federal Trade Commission rule would bar businesses from charging hidden or misleading fees and require them to disclose whether any fees are refundable. It would apply to a wide range of industries subject to FTC oversight, including event ticketing, hotels and apartments, and car rentals.

Biden lauded Ticketmaster and SeatGeek Inc. in June for launching initiatives to make it easier for consumers to see all costs right away.

StubHub in 2022 agreed to pay consumers $20 in cash or purchase credits of $500 to resolve claims by a customer who claimed it waited until the end of a transaction to add fees, which sometimes increased the cost of a ticket by as much as 30%.

The case is Alcaraz v. StubHub Inc., 24-cv-427, US District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).

 

 

Copyright Bloomberg News

Recent articles & video

SCC confirms manslaughter convictions in case about proper jury instructions on causation

Law firm associate attrition continues to decline, NALP Foundation study shows

How systemizing law firm work allocation enhances diversity efforts and overcomes affinity bias

Dentons advises Saturn on $600 million acquisition of Saskatchewan oil assets

Ontario Court of Appeal upholds anesthesiologist’s liability in severe birth complications case

BC Supreme Court assigns liability in rear-end vehicle collision at Surrey intersection

Most Read Articles

BC Supreme Court rules for equal asset division in Port Alberni property dispute

BC Supreme Court rules vehicle owner and driver liable for 2011 Chilliwack collision

BC Supreme Court upholds solicitor-client privilege in medical negligence case

Petition to remove estate executor does not amount to ‘reprehensible conduct:’ BC Supreme Court