LA Fitness Lawsuit: FTC Claims, Defenses, and Click-to-Cancel

The LA Fitness lawsuit at the center of national attention is a federal case the Federal Trade Commission filed in August 2025, accusing the gym chain of making memberships unreasonably hard to cancel and collecting hundreds of millions of dollars in unwanted fees as a result. The suit targets Fitness International, LLC and Fitness & Sports Clubs, LLC, the operators behind LA Fitness, Esporta Fitness, City Sports Club, and Club Studio, a network of more than 700 locations across 27 states and Canada.¹ As of mid-2026, the case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, and LA Fitness is fighting to have it dismissed.

What the FTC Says LA Fitness Did

The complaint describes memberships that cost between $30 and $299 per month and continued indefinitely unless a member successfully navigated the cancellation process.² Tens of thousands of consumers filed complaints about the cancellation practices, according to the FTC, with thousands more reporting problems to state authorities and consumer groups.³

The specific obstacles the FTC identifies include the following.

Members who tried to cancel at a gym could only do so through a designated operations manager. No other staff member was authorized to process the request, and because those managers were often absent, members had to return multiple times even though gyms were open up to 19 hours a day.¹
Members canceling by mail had to download and print a form from the website, then send it by certified or registered mail, requiring a trip to the post office and extra cost.³
The online cancellation form was not available on the mobile app and required logging in with an email address, a key tag number, and the first five digits of a payment method, a process the FTC called “cumbersome.”¹
Employees were trained to reject cancellation requests made by phone or email, directing members back to the in-person or mail routes.¹
When frustrated members disputed charges through their bank or credit card company, the FTC alleges LA Fitness often rebilled them under new account numbers.¹
Members were not clearly told they could cancel individual add-on services without losing their entire membership, something the FTC says virtually any gym employee could have processed.¹

The complaint also alleges LA Fitness maintained a separate, faster cancellation track for members whose complaints were escalated through a state attorney general or the Better Business Bureau, while keeping the more cumbersome process in place for everyone else.³

The Laws Involved and What the FTC Wants

The suit charges LA Fitness with violating two federal statutes. The first is the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive business practices. The second is the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, or ROSCA, a 2010 law that requires businesses to provide simple cancellation methods and to obtain clear consent before charging consumers for recurring services.⁴ The commission voted 3-0 to authorize the complaint.¹

The FTC is asking the court for a permanent injunction to stop the alleged practices and for monetary relief to refund affected consumers. The complaint alleges LA Fitness “illegally charged hundreds of millions of dollars in unwanted recurring fees,” though it does not specify an exact restitution figure.⁵⁶ Christopher Mufarrige, the FTC’s Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection, said the complaint describes “a scenario that too many Americans have experienced — a gym membership that seems impossible to cancel.”¹

How LA Fitness Is Defending Itself

Fitness International pushed back the same day the complaint was filed. Jill Hill, President of Club Operations, called the allegations “without merit.” The company’s central legal argument is that ROSCA was designed for online retail transactions and has never been applied to health clubs. Because most LA Fitness memberships are purchased in person, the company contends ROSCA does not reach its business.⁷

LA Fitness also pointed to its existing online cancellation option, which it says was launched roughly 18 months before the FTC’s now-vacated Click-to-Cancel rule was scheduled to take effect, and which the company kept active after that rule was struck down.⁷

In December 2025, the company filed a formal motion to dismiss, arguing the complaint lacked “any real allegations” of harm and that ROSCA “doesn’t apply to brick-and-mortar businesses.”⁸ LA Fitness also said its historical references to certified or registered mail were recommendations to protect members’ records, not requirements.⁹

Where the Case Stands Now

The case is assigned to Judge John W. Holcomb in the Central District of California, docketed as Case No. 8:25-cv-01841.⁹ In January 2026, the FTC filed an amended complaint.¹⁰

As of mid-2026, the case remains at the motion-to-dismiss stage. The court issued a tentative order that appeared to credit the FTC’s claim that LA Fitness historically lacked an online cancellation option for many years, and LA Fitness is urging the judge to reconsider that tentative order.⁹ No final ruling on the motion has been reported. If the case survives dismissal, it would proceed to discovery and eventually trial.

Why the Vacated Click-to-Cancel Rule Matters Here

The legal backdrop is important because the FTC tried and failed to regulate this exact conduct by rule. In October 2024, the agency finalized its Click-to-Cancel rule, which would have required all businesses, including gyms, to make cancellation as easy as signing up.¹¹ The rule was set to take effect on July 14, 2025, but on July 8, 2025, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated it in Custom Communications, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission. The court found the FTC had failed to conduct a required preliminary regulatory analysis once it became clear the rule would impose annual costs exceeding $100 million.¹²

The vacatur is central to LA Fitness’s defense. The company argues the FTC lost its rulemaking effort and is now trying to achieve the same result case by case under ROSCA. The FTC maintains its LA Fitness suit stands on its own under existing law, regardless of what happened to the rule.⁶

Earlier Lawsuits Against LA Fitness

The FTC case is not the first legal action over LA Fitness’s cancellation practices. Several private class actions filed between 2010 and 2013 were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The lead cases, including Vaughn v. L.A. Fitness International, LLC and Silver v. L.A. Fitness International, LLC, alleged the company made it “virtually impossible to cancel” monthly memberships without paying at least one or two extra months of dues, in violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. LA Fitness denied the allegations but settled. Class members who had cancelled between May 2006 and January 2013 were eligible for a 45-day gym access pass and potential refunds for dues charged after cancellation. The settlement closed in 2013.¹³

A separate matter involved disability access. The Department of Justice sued LA Fitness in October 2024, alleging a pattern of Americans with Disabilities Act violations that included broken pool and spa lifts, architectural barriers in showers and restrooms, and surcharges imposed on members with disabilities to cover the cost of required modifications.¹⁴¹⁵ In June 2025, Judge Stephen V. Wilson dismissed the complaint without prejudice, finding the government’s allegations did not sufficiently show a system-wide pattern of discrimination and failed to give LA Fitness adequate notice of the claims.¹⁶ Rather than refile, the DOJ voluntarily dismissed the case in July 2025 without explanation.¹⁷

1
FTC. FTC Sues LA Fitness for Making It Difficult for Consumers to Cancel Gym Memberships
2
CBS News. LA Fitness Operators Sued Over Gym Cancellation Policy
3
Courthouse News Service. FTC Sues LA Fitness Over Onerous Cancellation Policy
4
FTC. Cancelling a Gym or Other Membership Shouldnt Be a Heavy Lift
5
FTC. LA Fitness Complaint
6
U.S. PIRG Education Fund. LA Fitness Sued by Feds Over Gym Membership Cancellation Policies
7
PR Newswire. Fitness International LLC Responds to FTC Complaint
8
Law360. LA Fitness Says FTC Can’t Expand Online Shopping Law
9
Law360. Federal Trade Commission v. Fitness International LLC et al
10
FTC. LA Fitness – Amended Complaint
11
FTC. Federal Trade Commission Announces Final Click-to-Cancel Rule
12
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Custom Communications Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission
13
Top Class Actions. LA Fitness Membership Cancellation Class Action Settlement
14
U.S. Department of Justice. U.S. v. Fitness International dba LA Fitness
15
U.S. Department of Justice. U.S. v. Fitness International LLC Complaint
16
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. United States v. Fitness International LLC
17
CourtListener. United States v. Fitness International LLC dba LA Fitness