Court Rules
All enforcement actions
SettlementCritical Risk

Travel App Hopper to Pay $35 Million to Settle FTC Allegations It Charged Fees Without Consent and Deceived Users About Fees and Benefits of Some Products

Hopper Inc.July 2, 2026Federal Trade Commission

Penalty Amount

$35,000,000

Summary

The FTC alleged that Hopper, a travel booking app, charged consumers hidden and pre-selected fees (Tip and VIP Support) without their consent, and misrepresented the benefits of its VIP Support and Price Freeze services. Hopper agreed to pay $35 million for consumer redress and is prohibited from misrepresenting fees, with requirements to clearly disclose fees and total prices.

Remedy

Hopper must pay $35 million for consumer redress. The company is prohibited from misrepresenting any fees and must clearly and conspicuously disclose fees, charges, total price, and final payment amount.

Monetary PenaltyInjunction

Contract Impact

In-house legal teams should review vendor agreements with travel booking platforms and any customer-facing terms to ensure that all fees are clearly disclosed and that consumers provide affirmative consent before any charges are applied. Specifically, check clauses related to additional fees, pre-selected options, and the process for obtaining consent. Also review any representations about service benefits (e.g., VIP support, price freeze) to ensure they are accurate and not misleading. Update contracts to include clear disclosure requirements and consent mechanisms, and consider adding provisions that prohibit dark patterns in user interfaces.

Contract Search Terms

hidden feespre-selected feesopt-in consentfee disclosuretotal priceVIP supportprice freezedark patternsoptional feesconsent to charge

Laws Cited

FTC ActFTC's Unfair and Deceptive Fees Rule
15 U.S.C. §4516 C.F.R. Part 464

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

Hopper Inc.

Industry

Technology

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Entity Name
"Canadian company Hopper Inc. and its Massachusetts-based subsidiary Hopper (USA) Inc"
Fine Amount
"agreed to pay $35 million"
Laws Cited
"violated the FTC Act and, for short-term lodging bookings since May 12, 2025, the FTC’s Unfair and Deceptive Fees Rule"
Violation Types
"unfairly charged users without their consent for “Tip” and VIP Support fees"

Related Enforcement Actions

FTC

CMG Media Corporation

$930K

The FTC finalized orders requiring CMG Media Corporation (doing business as Cox Media Group), MindSift LLC, and 1010 Digital Works LLC to pay a total of $930,000 for falsely claiming they offered an AI-powered service that could target ads based on conversations captured from consumers' smart devices, and that consumers had opted into such targeting. The orders also prohibit the companies from making misrepresentations about their advertising services, voice data collection, and consumer consent.

FTC

Federal Trade Commission

The FTC announced it is seeking public comment on a proposed enforcement policy statement regarding personalized pricing, which is the use of personal data to set prices based on what a company believes an individual consumer is willing to spend. The statement warns that undisclosed collection or use of personal data for personalized pricing could violate the FTC Act's prohibition on unfair or deceptive practices. The Commission voted 2-0 to authorize the Federal Register notice.

FTC

Chase Nissan LLC

$4.0M

The FTC and Connecticut secured a $4 million settlement with Chase Nissan LLC (doing business as Manchester City Nissan) over allegations the dealership charged consumers unauthorized fees, including double-charging for 'certified pre-owned' vehicles and inserting charges like total loss protection into financing agreements without consent. The settlement requires $4 million in consumer redress, prohibits misrepresentations about vehicle certification and warranties, mandates prominent disclosure of the maximum total vehicle price, and requires express informed consent for all charges.

FTC

Credit Glory LLC

The FTC filed a complaint against Credit Glory LLC and related entities for deceptive credit repair practices, including false promises, impersonating debt collectors, charging illegal upfront fees, and using negative option billing without consent. A federal court temporarily halted the operation.

FTC

Federal Trade Commission

The FTC issued a policy statement abandoning disparate-impact liability, stating it will no longer bring claims based on this theory. It also modified compliance obligations for several companies based on past decisions.

FTC

Hims & Hers

The FTC, along with Utah and California, filed a complaint against Hims & Hers alleging the telehealth provider shared consumers' sensitive health information with third-party advertising platforms without consent, and deceived consumers about billing and cancellation practices. The complaint alleges violations of the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act.