Soapy Joe’s Hit With Class Action Over Unwanted Auto-Renewing Car Wash Plans

Case Overview: The lawsuit claims Soapy Joe’s illegally placed customers in recurring car wash plans without clear consent.

Consumers Affected: Customers enrolled in Soapy Joe’s automatic monthly memberships.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California

A new lawsuit claims that Soapy Joe’s, a popular car wash company, routinely traps customers in automatically renewing monthly plans, often without their knowledge.

The filing says the company withholds key terms, hides higher post-promo prices, and charges debit cards long after customers believe they’ve paid for a single wash. According to the complaint, these practices violate California’s Automatic Renewal Law and several other state consumer-protection statutes. 

It is the latest in a growing line of proposed class action lawsuits filed over allegedly illegal subscription schemes.

Customer Says She Was Signed Up for a Monthly Plan Without Permission

The case is led by Maryssa Tate, who says a trip to a Soapy Joe’s location in San Diego County left her paying for a membership she never agreed to. 

She believed she was buying a one-month promotional deal for $13. Instead, an employee allegedly took her debit card and enrolled her in a recurring plan without explaining renewal terms, cancellation procedures, or that the price would later jump to $25 per month.

Tate argues never received disclosures before being signed up and only learned she had been placed in a long-term membership after multiple charges hit her account. When she questioned the charges, she says Soapy Joe’s continued to attempt withdrawals and ignored her messages. 

The lawsuit claims she suffered financial harm and that her experience reflects systemic practices across the company’s more than 20 California locations.

Complaint Says Soapy Joe’s Violated California’s Auto-Renewal Law

In the complaint, Soapy Joe’s is accused of exploiting the broader boom in subscription-based business models, where companies increasingly rely on recurring billing and consumer inertia to keep revenues flowing.

As subscription services spread into brick-and-mortar sectors, including car washes, many rely on confusing sign-up flows, opaque cancellation paths, and aggressive promotional tactics that can mislead customers into recurring payments.

Tate’s complaint says Soapy Joe’s online and in-person enrollment systems share the same problems: missing disclosures, unclear instructions for canceling, failure to obtain affirmative consent, and nondisclosure of price increases after discounted trial periods. 

These alleged omissions, the filing states, violate multiple provisions of the Automatic Renewal Law and unjustly enrich the company.

Subscription-Based Businesses Face Growing Legal Scrutiny

Soapy Joe’s isn’t alone. Another major car wash chain operating across multiple states is accused in a separate lawsuit of quietly locking customers into memberships and raising prices without permission. 

The legal pressure extends far beyond car washes: Hairmax International is alleged to have renewed product subscriptions without proper disclosures, while DoorDash and Apple face claims that consumers were unknowingly enrolled in the DashPass subscription through Apple Pay. 

Additional cases name OnlyFans, NordVPN, and streaming service Fox Nation, all accused of renewing memberships without clear authorization or transparent renewal terms.

Tate seeks to represent consumers nationwide who were charged for Soapy Joe’s monthly services without giving proper written authorization or receiving required terms.

By bringing a class action, she aims to recover monetary damages, restitution, and attorneys’ fees, and requests court orders blocking Soapy Joe’s from continuing the practices.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Tate v. Soapy Joe’s Inc.
• Case Number: 3:25-cv-03119-AGS-KSC
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California 

Plaintiffs' Attorney:

• Ryan J. Ellersick (Zimmerman Reed LLP)
• Christopher D. Jennings, Tyler B. Ewigleben, and Winston S. Hudson (Jennings & Earley PLLC)

Have you ever been charged for a membership you didn’t agree to? Tell us below.