Disgruntled Daters: Don’t Blame Match.com

Match.com, which touts itself as being responsible for more dates, relationships, and marriages than other on-line dating services, has successfully fought off several class action lawsuits filed by disgruntled would-be, current, and former subscribers. One group claimed that the company’s false and misleading advertising duped them into becoming subscribers. Another contended that the company failed to deliver on its promises to give them access to a legitimate and genuine dating service.

Both groups claimed that they were entitled to money damages based on Match.com’s breaches of subscriber contracts, plus an additional amount based on its violation of Texas’ unfair and deceptive trade practices statute.

After reading the terms of service contained in Match.com’s subscriber agreements, a Texas court dismissed the case. He interpreted the them as addressing plaintiffs’ obligations as subscribers, not establishing contractual obligations of Match.com. The language in no way required Match.com to police, vet, update the website’s content, verify the accuracy of profiles before posting them, or undertake any of the actions the plaintiffs claimed were required by the agreements’ terms.