Hopper’s Price Freeze Protection Does Not Fully Protect Travelers from Ticket Price Increases, Class Action Says [DISMISSED]

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action claims Hopper has misled consumers by falsely advertising that the “Price Freeze” tool offered on its website and app would fully protect travelers from any price increases when purchasing a flight ticket.

Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.

According to the 19-page case, Hopper markets a price freeze service whereby customers can pay a $67 fee to have the price of a plane ticket fixed for 20 days. The suit explains that Hopper, which operates the most downloaded travel app in North America and one of the most visited travel websites, tells potential travelers that after they select a particular flight, they can:

The filing argues that based on these representations, consumers expect that Hopper’s price freeze feature will cover the full price difference when the price of a flight increases beyond the frozen amount. However, Hopper fails to mention during the flight selection process that should a ticket price increase, the company will cover only up to $100 of the difference, the case contends.

The company’s fine print terms call this limitation a “service cap,” the complaint says.

The fine print terms say that should “the price of [the] Price Freeze flight [] increase[] more than the Service Cap amount, [the] stored payment method will be charged the current airline ticket price less the Service Cap,” the suit relays.

Per the suit, this “opaque and non-disclosed” limitation is only made clear to consumers in a confirmation email after they have already purchased the price freeze, or to website or app users who actively click links for more information. 

The complaint further alleges that Hoppers’ misleading representations allow it to sell more tickets and price freeze options at higher prices than similar travel protection services represented in a non-misleading way. Consumers would not have purchased price-freeze tickets, or would have paid less for them, had they known that Hopper enforces a service cap, the case contends.

The lawsuit seeks to cover anyone in California, Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, Oregon or Washington who purchased tickets and/or price freeze protection from Hopper during the applicable statute of limitations period.   

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here