News: 0175130353

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

New California Law Requires One-Click Subscription Cancellations (thedesk.net)

(Wednesday September 25, 2024 @11:20AM (msmash) from the moving-forward dept.)


A new law in California will make it easier for consumers to [1]cancel their streaming subscriptions and similar products when they enroll in automatic renewal of those services. From a report:

> The law, passed through Assembly Bill (AB) 2863, will require companies that offer automatic subscription renewals through one-click purchases to also offer customers a way to cancel their subscriptions through the same one-click method. California already had one of the toughest subscription cancellation laws in the country, requiring companies to offer a way to cancel a recurring subscription through the Internet if they allowed customers to sign up for a service that way.

>

> The initial law was meant to prevent companies from allowing customers to purchase a subscription through the web, while forcing them to call a hotline to cancel them. Consumer advocacy groups complained that companies would often subject customers to frustrating long wait times on the phone with the hope that they would eventually hang up without cancelling their service. While the law was good in theory, it contained at least one loophole: Companies were in compliance as long as they offered a way for customers to cancel their subscriptions online, but could make them click several links or visit several webpages with opt-in requirements before a cancellation request was processed.



[1] https://thedesk.net/2024/09/california-one-click-subscription-cancellation-law/



Is it that hard to cancel? (Score:1)

by Robert Goatse ( 984232 )

Seems like babysitting to me forcing companies to make it easier to cancel a subscription. Is the public really that slow where they can't figure how to stop a sub?

Re: (Score:2)

by XXongo ( 3986865 )

>> ... Is the public really that slow where they can't figure how to stop a sub?

> Seriously have you been living under a rock? No one is responsible for their own actions anymore.

Seriously, have you been living under a rock? Companies make it as hard as possible to cancel a subscription, hoping that a significant fraction of people will just give up and let them keep sucking your money.

Re: (Score:2)

by Growlley ( 6732614 )

you mean as opposed to trumptards where it is always some one else to blame?

Yes, it is that hard to cancel (Score:4, Informative)

by Geoffrey.landis ( 926948 )

> Seems like babysitting to me forcing companies to make it easier to cancel a subscription. Is the public really that slow where they can't figure how to stop a sub?

Yes. I've had subscriptions where I've literally had to spend an hour to cancel a twelve-dollar-a-month subscription; where the required way to cancel turned out to be to call the number given in small print and talk to a human being whose entire job description is apparently "try to stop the customer from cancelling". They deliberately make it hard, because they want that sweet free money that they can siphon off from you every month. If they could make it impossible to cancel they would do that, but instead they very deliberately make it as hard to to as they can manage.

Stopping a subscription should never be harder than signing up for it in the first place.

Re: (Score:3)

by Ksevio ( 865461 )

Absolutely. It should be just as easy to cancel a subscription as it is to sign up for one. Making people call up, navigate through a phone tree, wait on hold, then argue with a customer service rep shouldn't be necessary

Re: (Score:2)

by fred6666 ( 4718031 )

The problem is that they make it confusing on purpose, to increase chances that you miss your cancellation.

They also make it very easy to subscribe by accident.

Re: (Score:3)

by MobileTatsu-NJG ( 946591 )

> Seems like babysitting to me forcing companies to make it easier to cancel a subscription. Is the public really that slow where they can't figure how to stop a sub?

Try reading the provided article.

> The initial law was meant to prevent companies from allowing customers to purchase a subscription through the web, while forcing them to call a hotline to cancel them. Consumer advocacy groups complained that companies would often subject customers to frustrating long wait times on the phone with the hope that they would eventually hang up without cancelling their service.

Re: (Score:3)

by serviscope_minor ( 664417 )

Oh no the horror they are doing something pro consumer why do they hate America?

Yes companies need to be forced otherwise they will make it as hard as possible.

Re: (Score:3)

by Voyager529 ( 1363959 )

> Is the public really that slow where they can't figure how to stop a sub?

The problem is that it's *not* this simple. If it were as easy to stop a sub as it was to start, this wouldn't be a problem.

Instead, companies have a strong tendency to involve several convoluted steps (to "confirm"), commonly involving dark patterns or other forms of obfuscation ("Would you like to stay instead? Click the big-bright 'yes' button on the bottom right to keep your subscription, or the small, not-even-underlined 'no' button here in this line of text, if you'd like). There have even been report

Re: (Score:2)

by Pascoea ( 968200 )

> Seems like babysitting to me

You aren't wrong on that assessment. But, when the entities under your jurisdiction are behaving like babies, sometimes a babysitter is exactly what you need.

> Is the public really that slow where they can't figure how to stop a sub?

Cancelled a gym membership lately? If I can create a subscription by clicking a button, I should be able to cancel it in the same fashion. It shouldn't need phone calls, printed and signed forms, fax machines, email chains, support tickets, smoke signals, carrier pigeons, lawyers, or exorcists. It should be a button click. The fact that we need legisl

Re: (Score:1)

by VertosCay ( 7266594 )

> Is the public really that slow where they can't figure how to stop a sub?

Yes

Fascinating stuff -- also, credit cards! (Score:3)

by Mitreya ( 579078 )

Now who is also going to pass legislation that companies cannot continue charging subscription after the credit card expired.

In my recent experience, only one place kept hounding me to update the card. Several other vendors were able to renew the subscription anyway (even though I did not update the card on record).

Re:Fascinating stuff -- also, credit cards! (Score:4)

by Hoi Polloi ( 522990 )

I'd blame the CC company for letting it happen. A canceled card is a canceled card. No more charges and don't transfer them to my new card.

Re: (Score:2)

by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

It's a nomenclature issue. A cancelled card is just that - the card itself was cancelled, not the account. What you want is a closed account, or a new way to block further transactions from a particular retailer.

Re: (Score:2)

by MobileTatsu-NJG ( 946591 )

> What you want is a closed account, or a new way to block further transactions from a particular retailer.

I apologize for going off topic here but I wanted to mention that I want a way to block transactions from a particular retailer that exceed an amount I define. It's bad enough that more and more of them want to directly reach into my wallet, they love price increases, too. T-Mobile, for example, raised my rates after a very public statement that they would not. A few months before that they disallowed using credit cards to get a $20/mo autopay discount. So they now they have a very real chance of makin

Re: (Score:1)

by ihavesaxwithcollies ( 10441708 )

> T-Mobile Money

Hey now, I get a great exchange rate to AT&T Nickels. I only get charged a 3% currency fee, 7% convenience fee & a 12% government compliance fee. Bargain!

Re: (Score:1)

by ihavesaxwithcollies ( 10441708 )

> A cancelled card is just that - the card itself was cancelled, not the account.

I don't follow the logic. They are using the cancelled card to continue the sub. If the card is cancelled, it doesn't work. Yet, they use some cheap tricks to somehow continue charging.

Don't worry they'll just update the T&C to say, "we are gods, we'll do whatever we want. You now owe us a $30 cancelled card use fee"

The credit card companies are just in bed with the oligopoly corps to con you out of your money. They'll lie, cheat and steal all the way.

Re: (Score:2)

by mspohr ( 589790 )

I had a recurring subscription to some service and had to call them several times to try to cancel but they just wouldn't do it.

I finally removed my credit card information from my account so they couldn't charge it.

They continued to charge my account and I accumulated a balance due. I just ignored their pleas for payment and they eventually gave up.

Re: (Score:2)

by Pascoea ( 968200 )

> I just ignored their pleas for payment and they eventually gave up.

That's all well and good until they sell your account to the blood suckers. The kind of "collections companies" that buy the debt for pennies on the dollar and are have some insanely unscrupulous business practices. I hope you never have the pleasure of having one of those sorts of companies on your tail. And most likely the "I cancelled my card and haven't used the service since" isn't a sufficient excuse to absolve you of the debt.

Re: (Score:2)

by Pascoea ( 968200 )

Not sure what you're talking about. You can buy a plane ticket to whatever third world country will "just let you live your life" for about the same number of clicks as it takes to subscribe to Netflix. Not a fan of things in this country? Don't let the doorknob hit you in the ass on the way out.

Nice but not a big help (Score:2)

by Hoi Polloi ( 522990 )

I'd rather see a law requiring that canceling be approximately as easy as enrolling. Those businesses that have zero customer support and a sign up page but when you look for canceling it you find out there is no web page.

Re: (Score:2)

by fred6666 ( 4718031 )

> I'd rather see a law requiring that canceling be approximately as easy as enrolling.

I disagree. Canceling should be much easier.

To enroll you have to provide a lot of information (name, address, credit card) and choose a plan. No reason why cancelling should be that hard.

Slashdot time travel? (Score:2)

by Drethon ( 1445051 )

Did they post about the veto of this bill by the governor before posting about the bill itself?

[1]https://yro.slashdot.org/story... [slashdot.org]

[1] https://yro.slashdot.org/story/24/09/24/2034226/california-governor-vetoes-bill-requiring-opt-out-signals-for-sale-of-user-data

Re: (Score:2)

by dskoll ( 99328 )

That was a different bill (AB-3048). This is bill AB-2863.

Re: (Score:2)

by Drethon ( 1445051 )

> That was a different bill (AB-3048). This is bill AB-2863.

Thanks, it all looked similar but I failed to locate the bill number for the other one after a quick search of the ./ article. I retract my concern.

Parasitic Businesses (Score:2)

by hwstar ( 35834 )

Most businesses want a recurring revenue stream and will go to great lengths to protect it. They're sort of like aphids on a plant. They use the state as "ants" (regulatory capture, power of authority) to protect the aphids, and the ants "tax" the aphids by extracting the honeydew. Think of the consumers as the "plant" they're pretty powerless to stop the ant/aphid racket, especially at the federal level in the USA.

I wouldn't be surprised if the business affected by this get a law passed to preempt the Ca

At participating locations only.