/>iGreetings TCPAWorld!
I’m back with the latest. SunFlora, the Florida-based CBD company with a reputation for bold marketing, is now in a legal haze facing a proposed class action in Carroll v. Sunflora, Inc., 8:24CV02047, filed in the U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida for allegedly bombarding consumers with illegal robocalls. Plaintiff, a Florida resident who claims she never agreed to receive SunFlora’s prerecorded calls promoting CBD products, is at the center of this legal drama for alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act (FTSA).
The Complaint tells a story—an unsolicited call, a prerecorded voice, and an irresistible offer for CBD discounts. Here, the Plaintiff asserts she never consented to receive such calls, a fundamental violation of the TCPA and FTSA, both of which require clear, prior express written consent for prerecorded telemarketing messages. With statutory damages ranging from $500 to $1,500 per violation, SunFlora’s potential liability could reach eye-watering sums if a class is certified.
But the Plaintiff isn’t just asking for damages; she’s seeking a total overhaul of SunFlora’s practices. The Complaint demands injunctive relief to stop SunFlora from continuing its alleged unsolicited robocall spree.
SunFlora’s defense isn’t as clear as CBD oil—its terms of service and privacy policy are murky, filled with legal disclaimers, and heavy on the fine print, including arbitration clauses and class action waivers that could derail Plaintiff’s efforts to bring claims on behalf of a broader group. And then there’s this gem tucked away in the privacy policy:
“NOTHING IN THIS PRIVACY POLICY IS INTENDED TO CREATE OR PROVIDE ANY RIGHT OF ACTION FOR VIOLATION.”
This seemingly harmless disclaimer is a subtle yet powerful play by SunFlora—an attempt to dodge liability by stripping its privacy policy of any enforceable commitments. It’s the legal equivalent of a handshake agreement with crossed fingers behind your back.
SunFlora’s privacy policy and terms further reveal an opt-out process that feels more like a roadblock than a user-friendly feature. Customers must email a specific address to opt out of marketing communications—a cumbersome, friction-filled approach that seems designed to reduce opt-out rates. But let’s call it what it really is: a corporate strategy that values retention over respect. When companies make opting out harder than opting in, it’s not just poor design—it’s a calculated move to prioritize profit over principle. Courts are becoming more critical of these cumbersome barriers, often questioning whether they genuinely serve consumer protection or act as tools to retain marketing reach. For SunFlora, these legal tactics could ultimately prove more burdensome than beneficial, potentially drawing scrutiny much like a mislabeled CBD product. We’ll keep you posted as this legal dispute unfolds.
Keep it legal, keep it smart, and stay ahead of the game.
Talk soon!
