Skip to content Skip to navigation


Woman Working Out

Did you ever buy too many fitness sessions, or a fitness studio gift card for a friend, and find they’ve expired before they can be used? If you live in California or Florida, and you’ve bought fitness session series or fitness session gift cards with short expiration dates, we’d like to hear from you. The purchases we’re interested in are sometimes called “class packs” or “ClassPasses” or “series” and they work like gift certificates. They’re sold by studios such as Orangetheory Fitness, Flywheel Fitness, or Pure Barre, and they often have expiration dates as short as thirty or forty-five days. Federal law specifies that gift certificates and purchases that are handled like gift certificates must have a minimum five-year expiration date.

Ocean Spray CranGrape Juice

Ocean Spray CranApple Juice and CranGrape Juice have labels that claim that they contain “No High Fructose Corn Syrup, Artificial Colors, or Flavors” but the complaint for this class action alleges that both juices do contain artificial flavors, in violation of California’s advertising and consumer protection laws. According to the complaint, the CranApple Juice contains dl-malic acid and the Cran Grape Juice contains fumaric acid, both of which the complaint claims to be artificial flavors made from petrochemical products, and which California laws require to be indicated on the label as artificial flavors.

Image of Hands Writing Check

Part of the purpose of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) is to keep consumers from becoming confused about their debts, so that they can make the best possible decisions about how to handle them. But the complaint for this class action claims that plaintiff Brendalin Lugo was confused by two different parts of the letter she received from Trans-Continental Credit & Collection Corp. First, a section of the letter was in Spanish, and Lugo does not speak Spanish. Second, the letter indicated an interest charge of $0.00 which the complaint claims could imply that the company has the right to charge interest or that interest will be charged in the future. The complaint alleges that the letter violates the FDCPA because it is confusing to the consumer.

Papers Stamped "Debt Collection"

Plaintiff Afsar Raja allegedly borrowed money from WebBank for personal, family, or household purposes, but the complaint for this class action claims that the debt collection letter he received from Vital Recovery Services, LLC violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The letter claims that Raja owes some $700 in interest charges, but it fails to indicate whether interest is still accruing, making the letter misleading, according to the complaint, as to whether the debt will be paid in full if Raja pays the total indicated.


The complaint for this class action claims that insurer USAA hired another company to “review” medical claims submitted to it for Med Pay benefits and that that company used unfair systems to refuse, reduce, or deny claims for benefits for injured people. Some of the bills, the complaint contends, are refused via “coding errors, sham medical necessity reviews, and confidential statistical information, rather than the individual character of health care services required by an insured and their related expenses.” For other ones, the complaint claims that payment amounts are reduced by declaring them “unreasonable” or applying PPO or PPN treatment rates that do not apply to the insureds’ medical providers.

Image of Person Crushed by Debt

The complaint for this class action involves three different plaintiffs, all of whom were sent virtually the same debt collection letter by RUI Credit Services, Inc.—a letter which the complaint claims is deceptive and confusing, if not outright deceptive. The letter begins by stating that a previous letter was sent to the debtor, but this letter contains notices required to be part of the first communication with a debtor, including the notice that the debtor has thirty days to dispute the debt. The complaint claims that one of two things must be true: (1) The other letter contained the same notice, making this one confusing for the debtor as to when the thirty-day period ends, or (2) the company did not send a previous letter, making this one openly deceptive.

Nationwide Credit Logo

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) attempts to keep debt collectors from making deceptive or misleading statements in trying to collect debts, but the complaint for this class action claims that Nationwide Credit, Inc. sent plaintiff Stefano Cafiso a letter that contained two such deceptive statements. The first implied, according to the complaint, that paying his debt in full would improve his creditworthiness and chance of getting credit from Chase in the future. The second said that an offer to settle for less was a limited-time offer only good until a certain deadline, a restriction that the complaint says is not true.