The Allegations: Starbucks’ Mobile App Traps Users with “Dark Patterns”
A consumer protection group has filed a complaint with Washington’s Attorney General, alleging that Starbucks’ mobile app uses “dark patterns” to trap users in a cycle of beverage buying. The group, called the Washington Consumer Protection Coalition, claims that the Starbucks app employs unfair and deceptive tactics to make low funds on a Starbucks Card unusable. According to the coalition, this forces users to add more money to their accounts or risk losing the remaining balance.
Millions Impacted: Starbucks App Accused of Deceptive Payment Practices
Starbucks’ mobile app handles payments for over 31 million users, which is six million more than Google Pay. The coffee chain is now facing accusations that it encourages users to add funds to their Starbucks Cards in large increments and then sets up barriers to prevent low balances from being used up. Last year alone, customers loaded approximately $15 billion onto their Starbucks Cards, highlighting the importance of digital payments for the company’s success. Washington’s Attorney General is now being called upon to investigate whether these practices are deceptive.
Frozen Funds: Starbucks App’s Unusable Low Balances Under Fire
When it comes to adding money to their Starbucks Cards, the app suggests users upload at least $25 at a time. However, the cheapest drinks at Starbucks can cost as little as $3 in some areas. If a user’s balance falls below the price of the cheapest drink, the funds effectively become frozen in the app. In other words, users cannot use the remaining balance to make a purchase, leave it as a tip, or combine it with other payment methods. The Washington Consumer Protection Coalition argues that it is nearly impossible to bring the balance down to zero via the mobile app, forcing users to add more funds.
No Escape: Starbucks Customers Forced to Add Funds or Lose Money
According to a spokesperson from Starbucks, users can visit a physical store and ask a barista to use their Starbucks Card from the app alongside another payment method to zero out their balance during a purchase. However, the inability to perform this action directly on the mobile app itself raises questions about the app’s convenience and ease of use. The spokesperson declined to comment on this matter. Starbucks has stated that it is committed to working with the State of Washington to ensure compliance with all state laws and regulations.
Dark Patterns Exposed: Consumer Group Calls for Action against Starbucks
The Washington Consumer Protection Coalition describes the tactics employed by Starbucks’ mobile app as “dark patterns.” Dark patterns are software design tactics that subtly trick users into taking actions they did not intend, such as spending more money or sharing personal information. The Attorney General of Washington recently compelled Google to pay $40 million for its use of dark patterns in relation to deceptive location tracking. The coalition asserts that Starbucks’ practices also fall under the category of dark pattern deception and calls for action to be taken against the company. The Federal Trade Commission has previously highlighted various common dark patterns, including difficult-to-cancel subscriptions, hidden fees, and methods of tricking consumers into sharing their data.
Disclaimer: This article is based on allegations made by the Washington Consumer Protection Coalition and does not reflect a confirmed legal decision or ruling. The statements made in this article are subject to the investigation by Washington’s Attorney General.
Analyst comment
The news regarding allegations against Starbucks’ mobile app using “dark patterns” is negative for the company. If the allegations are proven true, Starbucks may face legal consequences and damage to their reputation. The market may react negatively in the short term due to the uncertainty and potential impact on the company’s digital payments system. However, the long-term impact will depend on the outcome of the investigation and Starbucks’ ability to address the concerns raised by the consumer protection group.
