Subscription-Based Businesses Under Attack in COVID-19 Pandemic
Because of the unprecedented nature of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fact there are multiple ticket or subscription models there is no one way businesses should be addressing the situation.
June 10, 2020 at 02:38 PM
4 minute read
Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly all entertainment and recreational facilities across the country have closed. These businesses often face a tough choice: (1) allow customers to cancel their accounts and risk losing customers to competitors once businesses reopen or (2) offer remote services and provide other credits, but risk an accusation (baseless or otherwise) that the business has breached its contracts with customers.
Regulation and Litigation for Subscription-Based Businesses Spurred by COVID-19
Attorneys general of Arizona, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Washington, D.C., and Washington state have issued demand letters insisting gyms stop charging customers and allow the cancellation of accounts without fees. Businesses in other states that continued to charge their customers received numerous consumer complaints and demand letters threatening litigation. Most concerning is that plaintiffs lawyers from coast to coast have already launched federal class action lawsuits against gyms, educational institutions, event promoters and ticket resellers.
These lawsuits allege that businesses that continued to collect membership fees despite the business being closed are liable under a wide variety of legal theories including: breach of contract, breach of express warranties, conversion, fraud, money had and received, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment. Furthermore, the California-specific lawsuits are also alleging breaches of California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act, California's Unfair Competition Law, California's False Advertising Law, and California's Health Studio Services Contract Law. California's Health Studio Services Contract Law specifically notes that a customer can cancel their membership when "the health studio eliminates or substantially reduces the scope of the facilities."
How to Protect Your Business
To help mitigate these legal challenges, some potential business solutions to consider include:
- Giving patrons a "credit" on their account for fees charged while the business was closed.
- Allowing patrons to cancel membership without a cancellation fee.
- Allowing patrons to put membership or subscriptions on hold.
- Offering online fitness classes at a discounted rate.
- Offering patrons additional perks or discounts to use once businesses reopen.
- Asking patrons to donate to a nonprofit organization rather than refunds to canceled performances or events.
When setting a particular policy, businesses should consider the following key legal issues:
- What state law will apply? For example, New York, Virginia and Maryland prohibit health clubs from charging membership fees while the clubs remain closed for more than 30 days. Moreover, the California Health Studio Services Contract Law governs disclosure requirements, cancellation procedures, and other aspects of health studio services operating in California.
- Does the membership agreement include an arbitration or class action waiver provision?
- Does the membership agreement include a force majeure provision?
- Does the membership agreement determine whether the business is able to make a unilateral change to the contract—such as choosing to extend the customer membership period rather than refunding membership fees?
What's Next
Because of the unprecedented nature of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fact there are multiple ticket or subscription models there is no one way businesses should be addressing the situation. But it is certain that litigation against entertainment and recreational businesses will likely increase over the coming months.
If a business receives a demand letter from a consumer or plaintiffs counsel or is served with a complaint it should immediately contact counsel and review any applicable insurance policies. Unfortunately, most business interruption insurance policies do not cover COVID-19, but some claims may trigger other policies such as directors and officers coverage.
Kim Matthews serves as the vice president, general counsel and corporate secretary of Hot Topic. She has more than two decades of in-house legal experience in telecommunications, retail, franchise, compliance and regulatory matters for well-known domestic and international brands.
Joshua Briones is managing member of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo's Los Angeles office. Briones has served as lead defense counsel on over 500 alleged nationwide class actions in state and federal courts across the country.
Crystal Lopez is an associate in the firm's Los Angeles office whose practice focuses on class action defense, with an emphasis on consumer fraud, data privacy, marketing, accessibility, cybersecurity and compliance issues.
Adam B. Korn is an associate in the firm's Los Angeles office. His practice encompasses a wide range of business litigation and class action defense, with an emphasis on consumer fraud and products liability defense.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAI Disclosures Under the Spotlight: SEC Expectations for Year-End Filings
5 minute readA Blueprint for Targeted Enhancements to Corporate Compliance Programs
7 minute readThree Legal Technology Trends That Can Maximize Legal Team Efficiency and Productivity
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1‘The Decision Will Help Others’: NJ Supreme Court Reverses Appellate Div. in OPRA Claim Over Body-Worn Camera Footage
- 2MoFo Associate Sees a Familiar Face During Her First Appellate Argument: Justice Breyer
- 3Antitrust in Trump 2.0: Expect Gap Filling from State Attorneys General
- 4People in the News—Jan. 22, 2025—Knox McLaughlin, Saxton & Stump
- 5How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be Open to Opportunities, Ready to Seize Them When They Arise,' Says Lara Shortz of Michelman & Robinson
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250