Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 29 OCTOBER 2026

Optional Fee, Mandatory Problem: “Junk Fee” Class Actions Don’t Need A Drip-Pricing Violation Anymore

Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Contributor
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC

Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC

Founded more than 40 years ago as a boutique law firm servicing the entertainment and arts...

View firm profile
Explore more from Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC

California's Honest Pricing Law aimed to eliminate hidden fees, but recent litigation reveals a new battleground: optional fees presented through pre-checked boxes and default-on toggles. The Harris v. LoveShackFancy decision demonstrates how checkout design itself can trigger consumer protection claims, even when fees are technically optional and comply with drip pricing statutes.

United StatesConsumer Protection

California’s Honest Pricing Law (SB 478) was supposed to settle the junk fee question. Since July 2, 2024, businesses have had to include all mandatory fees in the advertised price. The only things they can leave out are government taxes and fees, and reasonable shipping costs for physical goods. It seemed clear that fees for optional services fall outside the statute and need not be baked into the advertised price. Businesses read that as a green light.

As we have seen from recent litigation, however, the plaintiffs’ bar has found a way around that, and optional fees are not safe after all.

The Theory: “Optional,” But Not Really

The new wave of complaints targets add-ons like “shipping protection” and “package protection.” These fees are technically optional, but the plaintiffs say they are built into the checkout process in a way that makes them feel mandatory. The usual allegations are:

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

www.fkks.com

This alert provides general coverage of its subject area. We provide it with the understanding that Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz is not engaged herein in rendering legal advice, and shall not be liable for any damages resulting from any error, inaccuracy, or omission. Our attorneys practice law only in jurisdictions in which they are properly authorized to do so. We do not seek to represent clients in other jurisdictions.

See more popular content from