A New York man has filed a class action lawsuit against popular dating site Match.com, claiming that the site deceives subscribers by showing them photos and profiles of non-paying members who can't respond to romantic advances.
Match.com allows anyone to create a profile for free, but in order to read or respond to messages, or contact potential partners, customers must sign up for a subscription with the website.
Sean McGinn, of Brooklyn, NY, alleges that this practice caused him "humiliation and disappointment" when he tried to contact non-subscribing members and never heard back from them. McGinn apparently took this to mean that his efforts had failed, when in fact his romantic interests were unable to read, let alone reply to, his messages without subscribing or re-activating an expired account. (Match.com doesn't delete profiles of members who have canceled their accounts or let them expire, further defrauding bachelors like McGinn.)
According to McGinn, the user agreement he signed when he created his account never warned him that not every profile is that of a bona fide member. McGinn asserts that Match.com "defrauds the consumer of his/her time and personal investment every time a person pays Match's subscription fee and writes to a member who won’t have the ability to read what they wrote or see their profile."
McGinn, already uncomfortable with dating, has been further traumatized by his online experience. His suit says that "despite the emotional vulnerability inherent in the dating process, fraught as it is with fear of rejection and anxiety, Match defrauds the consumer of his/her time, labor, and emotional investment" by failing to inform them that non-subscribing members cannot reciprocate their sweet nothings.
McGinn's attorney, Norah Hart of Treuhaft & Zakarin, said that affected consumers "are left feeling they've been completely ignored and rejected," and said that the website's practice "could affect their romantic future."
The suit alleges counts under deceptive trade practices; fraud; negligent misrepresentation; and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, which describes a vendor's promise not to break its word or deny terms that were obviously implied or read into the contract. Although McGinn has not specified the exact amount of money he is seeking, his attorneys expect the damages to be at least $5 million.
This isn't the first time that Match.com has been accused of using fraudulent practices to lure lonely souls to its homepage. In November 2005, Matthew Evans of Los Angeles accused the site of creating fake profiles and sending him "winks" from non-existent members to lure him into renewing his subscription. That suit was dismissed in 2007.
Earlier this year, Match.com competitor eHarmony was the target of a class action based on its strident anti-gay discrimination. The suit stemmed from an earlier action citing eHarmony's refusal to add "man seeking man" or "woman seeking woman" to its menu of choices. The latest claim accuses eHarmony of employing a "separate but equal" approach by creating an entirely new site — CompatiblePartners.com — rather than modifying the existing eHarmony site.
Online dating has become enormously popular over the past few years. It is estimated that over 20 million people visit an online dating service every month, and in 2006, fully 31 percent of Americans said they knew someone who had used an online dating service. A 2004 report found that internet dating sites had collected a total of $473 million in advertising revenues.
Match.com, based in Dallas, has vowed that they will "defend [the suit] vigorously."
More about online dating ...
Source: consumeraffairs.com
