SANTA ANA, Calif. (Legal Newsline) - A Google Drive customer with hopes of leading a class action over violations of California’s automatic-renewal law has no case, a California appeals court has ruled.
Plaintiff Eric Mayron sued under a state law that prohibits companies from charging consumers for products and services without their express consent. Automatic renewals and unsolicited deliveries are considered “an unconditional gift to the consumer” under the law unless the purchaser gave express consent.
Mayron argued Google’s subscription data plan violated the law because it failed to provide adequate disclosures and the company didn’t obtain his consent to begin a $1.99-a-month subscription. Google responded that Section 17600 of the California Business and Professional Code doesn’t provide for a private right of action and Mayron hadn’t suffered any harm, anyway.
The California Court of Appeal for the Sixth District in Santa Clara County agreed with Google, finding the language and history of Section 17600 give no indication legislators intended it to be a tool for private lawsuits. While the law allows consumers to keep unsolicited shipments as gifts without paying for them, only the state can enforce the law against companies, the court ruled.
The court also rejected Mayron’s claim he was the victim of unfair practices, saying the mere fact Google may have violated the automatic renewal statute doesn’t mean he was injured by the company’s conduct.
“A consequence imposed on a defendant for violating a statute is not the same thing as a loss caused by the defendant’s conduct,” the court ruled. “The relevant inquiry for standing purposes is whether a defendant’s unlawful conduct caused the plaintiff to part with money.”