The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) is suing Hims & Hers Health, alleging that the telehealth company engaged in a range of deceptive practices related to its subscription and privacy policies. According to the complaint, Hims misled consumers into enrolling in recurring prescription subscriptions without their express informed consent, obscured recurring refill charges, made cancellation unnecessarily difficult, and falsely represented how it handled users’ sensitive health information.
The Hims lawsuit arrives as the rapid rise of GLP-1s and other recurring prescription treatments is fundamentally changing the economics of telehealth. As recurring prescription subscriptions become central to the industry’s business model, regulators are increasingly scrutinizing not only the products telehealth companies sell, but also how those products are marketed, sold, and managed.
The Consumer Journey Under Scrutiny
Setting the stage in its July 29 complaint, the FTC alleges that Hims attracted consumers by advertising “free online consultations” and inviting users to determine whether treatment was “right” for them before purchasing prescription medications. According to the FTC, however, most consumers never actually received the consultation they expected. Instead, the FTC alleges that consumers were routinely charged and enrolled in automatically renewing subscriptions almost immediately after a provider reviewed their intake questionnaire, often without an opportunity to discuss, accept, or decline the recommended treatment.
The agency highlights to statements displayed throughout Hims’ intake process, including “Due Now $0,” “Pay $0 today,” and “You will only be charged if prescribed,” arguing that these representations conveyed that consumers were beginning a medical consultation rather than authorizing an immediate purchase.
The FTC also alleges that Hims failed to adequately disclose when recurring refill charges would occur, causing consumers to incur charges sooner than they reasonably expected and making it difficult to cancel before the next billing cycle. The agency similarly challenges Hims’ cancellation process, alleging that consumers had to navigate a confusing series of screens before they could even locate the option to cancel their subscriptions. It points to the design of that process itself as evidence that consumers faced unnecessary obstacles to ending their subscriptions.
Still yet, the FTC alleges that Hims described its platform as “100% online, private, and secure” and assured consumers that their sensitive health information would only be accessed by providers managing their care, while simultaneously sharing that information with advertising platforms, including Meta and Snap.
With the foregoing in mind, the FTC sets out claims under Section 5 of the FTC Act, the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (“ROSCA”), California’s Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law, and the Utah Consumer Sales Practices Act. In addition to a permanent injunction, the FTC and its state partners are seeking monetary relief, civil penalties, restitution, and other remedies.
THE BIGGER PICTURE: The FTC’s complaint against Hims reflects an expansive theory of consumer deception. Rather than relying primarily on advertising claims or terms and conditions, the agency weaves Hims’ marketing, enrollment flow, subscription mechanics, cancellation process, and privacy representations into a single narrative about how consumers were allegedly misled. In doing so, the FTC treats the customer journey as more than the mechanism through which consumers purchase healthcare services.
In short: the complaint suggests that what a company communicates to consumers increasingly cannot be separated from how its digital products are designed to operate.
The case is Federal Trade Commission v. Hims & Hers Health, Inc., 3:26-cv-07871 (N.D. Cal.).
Share
