Dating sites as cost traps

Whether someone is willing to pay a hefty price for something or not is usually the responsibility of adults themselves. From a legal point of view, it becomes problematic when interested parties buy something that has been advertised in a misleading way. In other words, when a service provided deviates significantly from the expectations created by the advertising. However, when it comes to dating, this does not mean a promise or even a guarantee that you will actually find the partner you long for. This cannot be guaranteed or demanded, even if the dating site advertises great success rates.

Misleading with fakes

Deception occurs when, after payment and registration, paid staff feign romantic interest and raise false hopes. Attractive profiles created by the company are presented as potential contacts. Appealing photos and descriptions create the impression of an attractive user group that does not actually exist. Particularly brazen is the use of paid employees or AI-controlled chatbots who pose as interested users during the trial period in order to entice users into paying for membership. Unfortunately, this is very difficult to prove.

Alleged registration

But regardless of who you are dealing with on such a portal, the deception often lies simply in the fact that the victims are sent money claims (via debt collection agencies or law firms) for websites that they knowingly did not register with. The victims had usually registered on another website belonging to an umbrella company and, for example, overlooked the fact that they had to deactivate a pre-ticked checkbox in order not to enter into a contract with other site operators. Incidentally, resorting to such opt-out tricks is illegal. Just as illegal is a violation of the so-called button requirement by the website, where the confirmation button in the order process does not clearly indicate the payment obligation. Even if a contract is confirmed as terminated by the company network, the operators of the other sites continue to charge or send aggressive reminders.

We are receiving an increasing number of complaints of this kind about the Hungarian-registered company HowLogic KFT. Among other things, the company operates the following websites:
benaughty.com, chat-flirts.de, datesgern.com, delightsexy.com, engelderliebe.de, findedates.com, findepartner.com, flirtspielchen.de, frechespiele.de, gebensie.com, gibsmir.com, geilekontakte.com, geiletreffs.com, geileverabredungen.com, geilezeit.com, gaysgodating.com, klasseleute.de, laessigedates.com, lokalefrauentreffen.com, maturetenders.com, maturesforfuck.com, mitdirtreffen.com, scharfeliebe.de, spicydesires.com, treffegirls.com, waehlemich.com, wildspank.com

Hidden total price

One of the unfair marketing tricks is when offers do not clearly disclose which services are included – or rather, which unexpectedly are not included . Only after registering and paying does it become clear that additional costs are incurred. For example, for advanced search functions or filters. Or to be able to contact particularly attractive profiles at all – a privilege that is only included in the premium tariff.

A particularly clever method of concealing extra costs: contacting desirable profiles is only enabled after completing a survey. This is supposedly to check whether the two users are a "match", i.e. compatible with each other – but in fact, this step is only possible for an additional fee, even though a monthly subscription has already been paid for.

Dating portals obviously use a variety of obscuration methods (dark patterns) to deliberately make the actual costs unclear. Instead of the advertised, stated monthly fee, the operating companies often demand several hundred pounds in unexpected annual fees in the disputes we handle. The surprise of such high costs often arises because the trial subscription was much cheaper and the company deliberately only stated these initial costs.

Ungewollte Abos und Verlängerungen

Whether an existing paid subscription is renewed or a trial subscription expires and automatically becomes chargeable. Very often, the information required by law is inadequate and deliberately designed to be opaque (see Lawsuits against Parship) or completely insufficient (50sLove). Particularly brazen dating portals do not provide any information at all (C-Date). The law requires a separate reminder letter informing customers about the contract extension if they do not cancel it themselves. The company must inform you clearly and in good time of the action required to prevent the contract from being extended. The law also stipulates a reasonable notice period for cancellation.

Operators such as HowLogic KFT ignore the requirement to allow a reasonable period of time for rejection in their terms of use. A mere 12-hour deadline just before the renewal of a 3-day subscription. Or, for terms of less than 4 weeks, they only grant a 72-hour deadline. This is contestable and results in a high number of cases in our ECCnet database, with over five hundred complaints.

On the other hand, operators use all kinds of distraction tricks. There have been convictions, for example, for unfair business practices and contract clauses by PE Digital GmbH, the company behind Elitepartner and market leader Parship. Notification emails merely contained links to websites with details, instead of directly mentioning the upcoming renewal and the deadline in the text. The importance was downplayed, with no reference to a specific expiry date in the subject line. Instead: "Information about your current profile: Note on the term and automatic contract renewal of your membership". These generalities in the link text made it difficult to understand what it was all about. Anyone who followed the link had to log in. As a result, the information about the possible non-renewal and automatic continuation of the contract, costing several hundred pounds, was missed by many customers.

Cover up the extension

The portals like to use all sorts of tricks to distract users from contract renewals. There have been court rulings for example, due to unfair business practices and contract clauses used by PE Digital GmbH, the company behind Elitepartner and market leader Parship. The notification emails only contained links to the portal's home page. Instead of directly mentioning the upcoming renewal and the deadline in the text, members had to log in and actively check the current term in their profile settings. This was deliberately downplayed, with no reference in the subject line to a specific expiry date or the need for action. Instead: "Information about your current profile: Note on the term and automatic contract renewal of your membership". Customers were thus deliberately denied easy access to information about the possibility of preventing the renewal and the automatic continuation of the contract at a cost of several hundred pounds.

Right of withdrawal wrongfully denied

From a legal perspective, subscriptions to online dating agencies are distance service contracts. Normally, contracts concluded online offer the option of withdrawal (revocation). Within two weeks, it is possible to reconsider and decide not to use the service after all. 
However, the law now provides for an exception in the case of service contracts if the customer expressly requests early fulfilment of the contract and waives their right of withdrawal. Please note: even if the right of withdrawal has been duly waived, it can only be waived if the service has already been provided in full. 

Dating platforms (such as Dating Lions Ltd) often claim that the contract has already been fulfilled once the dating profile has been made available or access has been granted. However, the service consists largely of the transmission of suitable match suggestions and therefore cannot be terminated prematurely. The platforms can, however, demand compensation for the services already used. But even with this billing, tricks were used, and Parship allowed many departing customers to leave only to their disadvantage. Once again, those who had been cheated had to use our  sample letter to demand their money back and chase after it.

Tricks with the runtimes

If the small print mentions an extension by the "contract period", no one would expect, for example, when taking out a six-month subscription, that this would then automatically change to a 12-month contract. Hiding such relevant contract details in the small print and in the terms and conditions is illegal.

In general, consumers should not be subject to unreasonably long commitment periods. If the company commits to recurring services (which is usually the case with dating portals), the law provides for a option to cancel at the end of the first year. This was successfully challenged in court in the case of Parship's two-year contracts. This means that you can terminate a contract that lasts longer than one year up to 10 months before the end of the first year and will not have to pay for another year. After the first year has expired, you can terminate the contract every six months.