OnlyFans is facing mounting legal pressure after a new class-action lawsuit filed in California alleges the subscription-based platform uses “bait-and-switch” tactics that mislead customers about what they’re actually paying for.
The lawsuit, filed on January 26, claims that OnlyFans markets paid subscriptions as offering “full access” to a creator’s content, while much of that content remains locked behind additional paywalls, according to Mashable.
When users click “subscribe” on a paid account, they’re shown a pop-up that promises “full access to this user’s content” and the ability to direct message the creator.
According to the complaint, those representations don’t reflect the reality many subscribers encounter after paying.
The suit alleges that “millions of Fans have bought subscriptions only to discover that, behind OnlyFans’s paywalls, Creators’ exclusive content remains inaccessible.”
Instead, subscribers are often met with teaser posts and repeated prompts to pay extra to unlock the material they believed was included. In some cases, the complaint claims the only real benefit of subscribing is receiving mass direct messages advertising additional paid content.
“In essence, OnlyFans promises a buffet, but provides only a menu,” the complaint states.
The case includes more than 100 class members and alleges violations of California’s Consumers’ Legal Remedies Act, which prohibits deceptive business practices, including false advertising, as well as Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
The plaintiff, Los Angeles resident David Gardner, says he subscribed to two creators he discovered on X, only to find non-explicit teaser content and persistent upsell messages.
According to the filing, Gardner said he would like to subscribe to creators in the future but “cannot rely on OnlyFans’ representations” when deciding whether to do so.
While the California lawsuit moves forward, a separate class action in New York is still recruiting participants. That investigation is being led by Greenbaum Olbrantz LLP, which is examining whether OnlyFans misrepresented subscription offerings and violated consumer-protection laws.
The New York investigation focuses on subscribers who paid monthly fees—typically $4.99 to $19.99—only to cancel after discovering the content didn’t match the advertised content.
The firm is assessing whether these practices violate laws governing recurring billing and digital subscriptions, including the FTC’s Negative Option Rule and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, both of which require clear disclosure of material terms before charging consumers.
Greenbaum Olbrantz has taken a similar approach in other consumer cases, including recent lawsuits against Delta Air Lines and United Airlines over allegedly misleading “window seat” sales.
In the OnlyFans matter, the firm is currently collecting accounts from affected subscribers to determine eligibility for the New York-based class action.