Suing Match.com Proves To Be A Challenge

Contributed by: ElyseRomano on Monday, August 20 2012 @ 05:48 pm

Last modified on

Remember that class action lawsuit brought against Match.com? It's back. But before I get into the details, here's a little refresher course, for those whose memories could use a jog:

  • Dissatisfied Match members sued the company in December 2010 for failing to meet its obligations to its users.
  • The members felt that Match had misled them into believing that the site had millions of subscribers, when in fact more than half of the profiles were fake, scammers, or inactive.
  • A class action lawsuit was filed in U.S. District court in Dallas, Texas, claiming that Match.com is guilty of breach of contract.
  • A second part of the lawsuit says that Match uses "deceptive trade practices" as described under Texas law.
  • The complaint alleges that Match encourages members to renew their subscriptions by sending them messages expressing interest from inactive or fake profiles.
  • Full accusations include breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and negligent misrepresentation.
  • The plaintiffs sought unspecified damages and repayment of subscription fees

Match.com is not the first dating site to face such a fate. Yahoo found themselves battling a similar lawsuit in 2007, accused of allowing users who had no interest in dating to maintain profiles. Yahoo agreed to pay $4 million to settle the suit. Match has also been the subject of previous lawsuits, one in 2005 when the company was sued in California over allegations that it hires employees to create fake profiles and another in 2009. Both cases were dropped.

The latest update on the Match.com lawsuit came earlier this month, when a federal judge dismissed a major part of the suit. U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay ruled that Match is not in violation of its user agreements, and that the agreements do not require Match to remove profiles that are dormant or inaccurate. Judge Lindsay wrote that the Match.com agreement "in no way requires Match.com to police, vet, update the website content," or verify the accuracy of user profiles.

Regarding the other part of the lawsuit, alleging that Match is guilty of deceptive trade practices, Judge Lindsay has given the plaintiffs until August 27 to prove that this part of the lawsuit should not be dismissed as well.

A spokesman for Match.com announced that the company is pleased with the ruling, adding that Match has always considered the allegations "unfounded." Jeffrey Norton, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, says his team is currently reviewing the decision and considering the options for proceeding.

Looks like these Match members are finding no love online or at the courthouse.

Comment (0)

Dating Sites Reviews - Suing Match.com Proves To Be A Challenge
https://www.datingsitesreviews.com/article.php?story=Suing-Match-com-Proves-To-Be-A-Challenge