This class action lawsuit alleges that NAC Marketing Company, LLC committed violations of several provisions of California's Business and Professions Code by failing to meet the law's requirements for automatic renewal or continuous service offers in connection with the sale of testosterone supplements and other products.
The defendant in this case, NAC Marketing Company, operates throughout the California via a website which markets subscriptions for products that purport to boost male testosterone, support energy production, promote muscle building and increase overall vitality. Defendant customarily provides, on a monthly basis, a subscription for products such as its Ageless Male product at an initial cost of $19.95 plus $6.99 shipping, and then a subsequent monthly cost of of $39.95 plus $6.99 thereafter. The plaintiff purchased such a subscription plan for products offered by the defendant.
According to the complaint in this case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, the defendant made automatic renewal or continuous service offers via its website to consumers throughout the state and at the time of those offers:
All of these things occurred, according to the plaintiff, in clear violation of the specific requirements of California Business and Professions Code sections 17600-17606. As a result, it is alleged that all products sent to the plaintiff and other potential class members under the automatic renewal agreement must be deemed an unconditional gift for which plaintiff and class members have no obligation to bear any related costs.
The provisions of California law cited by the plaintiff in this case became effective on December 1, 2010 and were designed to halt the practice of ongoing charges being made to consumer's payment accounts by business enterprises which had not obtained explicit consent for continous shipment of products or deliveries of service. These sections of the Business and Professions Code outline in detail the requirements for obtaining necessary consent and for providing key notices and cancellation information to consumers.
Arguing that the defendant's website did not provide in clear and unambigous language the essential terms of the agreement , the plaintiff is now seeking a declaration that the defendant in fact violated all cited sections of California's Business and Professions Code, an order of restitution in the amount of subscription agreement payments made by class members, the costs of bringing suit and reasonable attorney fees.
This class action lawsuit was filed on November 8, 2015. We will continue to review the docket in the coming months and provide updates as needed.