FTC Sues Uber Over Alleged Deceptive Billing and Subscription Cancellation Practices

On December 15, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)—joined by 21 U.S. states and the District of Columbia—filed an amended complaint in federal court accusing Uber Technologies, Inc. of engaging in deceptive billing and cancellation practices related to its Uber One subscription service. Federal Trade Commission. The lawsuit builds on an earlier FTC complaint from April 2025 and adds new state-level claims, seeking civil penalties under consumer-protection statutes, including the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA) and various state laws.

📌 What Uber Allegedly Did Wrong

According to the FTC and state attorneys general, Uber’s practices hurt consumers in several key ways:

1. Unwanted Charges Without Clear Consent

• The complaint alleges that Uber enrolled users in Uber One—a paid subscription offering promised benefits like $0 delivery fees and monthly savings—without clearly obtaining consent. Federal Trade Commission

  
  

2. Misleading Promises About Savings

• Uber marketed the subscription as providing savings such as $25 per month and delivery fee waivers, but the FTC claims these figures were misleading because they did not account for the cost of the subscription itself. Mexico Business News

  
  

3. Premature Charges During Free Trials

• Many consumers were charged before their free trial ended, contrary to Uber’s representations that charges would not begin until after the trial. Federal Trade Commission

  
  

4. Obstacle Course to Cancellation

• Despite promises that users could “cancel anytime,” the complaint says Uber made cancellations unnecessarily complex, requiring some customers to navigate up to 23 screens and take as many as 32 actions in the app to end their subscription. Federal Trade Commission

  
  

🧑‍⚖️ The Legal Stakes

The amended complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The FTC and the states are asking the court to:

• Impose civil penalties for alleged violations of federal and state consumer protection laws,

• Enforce compliance with ROSCA and similar statutes,

• Provide relief to affected consumers.

  
  

This case reflects growing regulatory scrutiny of subscription-based business models and how tech companies disclose terms, fees, and cancellation procedures. Federal Trade Commission

🚗 Uber’s Position

Uber has denied the allegations, with company representatives stating that:

• Customers are only charged with consent,

• The cancellation process is straightforward and typically takes less than 20 seconds via the app. Reuters

As of the lawsuit’s filing, Uber’s stock experienced a market reaction, dipping more than 3 % following news of the amended complaint. TradingView

🧠 Why This Matters

Here’s what consumers and industry observers should take away:

🔹 Consumer Protection in Focus

This lawsuit underscores how federal and state regulators are paying closer attention to how companies handle subscriptions and recurring billing, especially when the language or interface might lead a customer to misunderstand what they’re signing up for.

🔹 “Cancel Anytime” Isn’t Always Simple

The case highlights that even when businesses promise easy cancellation, the actual process matters—a key point in consumer law.

🔹 Tech and Subscription Models Under Scrutiny

Much like other subscription-related disputes across industries, regulatory bodies are signaling that hidden fees, confusing sign-ups, and opaque cancellation steps could trigger legal action.

📍 What’s Next?

The case will proceed through the federal courts. If successful, it could result in:

• Fines or penalties against Uber,

• Orders to change how Uber markets and manages subscriptions,

• Broader implications for how apps must disclose billing practices.

• 
  

Consumers who believe they were wrongly charged can also consider filing their own complaints with the FTC.

Sources: FTC press release (Dec 15 2025) and related coverage detailing the amended complaint, allegations, and Uber’s response. Federal Trade Commission