Multiple Law Firms File Class Action Alleging CleanChoice Energy Overcharges Washington, D.C. Customers and Falsely Markets “Pollution-Free” Electricity

September 2026

Wittels McInturff Palikovic, together with co-counsel Finkelstein Blankinship Frei-Pearson & Garber LLP and Migliaccio & Rathod LLP, has filed a class action lawsuit against CleanChoice Energy, Inc. in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (Case No. 2026-CAB-006383) on behalf of District of Columbia utility customers who bought electricity from CleanChoice.

CleanChoice is the largest third-party electricity supplier in the District. The lawsuit alleges that CleanChoice lures D.C. residents in with a short-term introductory rate and then moves them onto a variable rate that its own contract promises will be tied to CleanChoice’s costs of supplying electricity. According to the complaint, CleanChoice’s rates far exceeded those costs and were much higher than commercially reasonable.

The plaintiff in the case, a Washington, D.C. resident, was allegedly charged an average of roughly two and a half times what the underlying electricity market supply costs would support, and his rate exceeded Pepco’s rates in every single month — in some months by more than four times. The complaint alleges that CleanChoice’s rates climbed even in months when wholesale costs fell, and that CleanChoice’s own fixed rates, on which it bears more price risk, were consistently far lower than the variable rates it charged D.C. customers.

The lawsuit also alleges that CleanChoice’s headline marketing promise — that customers will “get 100% clean, pollution-free energy” — is false. CleanChoice’s customers receive the same grid power as Pepco’s customers, generated in substantial part from fossil fuels. What CleanChoice actually buys, the complaint alleges, are inexpensive renewable energy certificates, sometimes from generators as far away as Iowa, South Dakota, and Wisconsin, and sometimes purchased months after the electricity was already used and burned in the District.

CleanChoice’s practices have drawn regulatory scrutiny in several states. The complaint describes a 2025 Notice of Probable Violation from the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities alleging that CleanChoice’s contracts were inaccurate and deceptive and that its actual practice was to raise prices regardless of market conditions and its energy costs; a $600,000 settlement with Illinois Commerce Commission staff and consumer advocacy groups in 2023; and settlements with the Illinois and Pennsylvania Attorneys General in 2016 and 2015.

The suit brings claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, violations of the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act, and unjust enrichment, and seeks damages, restitution, statutory and treble damages, punitive damages, and an injunction barring CleanChoice from continuing these practices.

If you were a CleanChoice customer in Washington, D.C. who was charged excessive electricity rates or who signed up believing you were buying pollution-free energy, we urge you to contact a class action attorney at WMP for a free case evaluation. There is no cost or fee involved in joining the case. You can contact us by clicking here, calling (914) 775-8862, or emailing us at case@wittelslaw.com. To read the class action complaint, please click here.

WMP Files $50 Million Class Action Lawsuit Against Asana Rebel Over Deceptive Automatic Renewal Practices

Wittels McInturff Palikovic has filed a $50 million class action lawsuit against Asana Rebel GmbH, the company behind the popular Asana Rebel fitness and lifestyle app, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Civil Action No. 1:25-cv-10358). The lawsuit is on behalf of Asana Rebel customers who were charged for illegal recurring subscriptions and prevented from canceling those subscriptions due to obstructive and exceedingly difficult cancellation processes.

What Is the Asana Rebel Lawsuit About?

The lawsuit alleges that Asana Rebel uses deceptive auto-renewal practices to trap consumers into recurring paid subscriptions without providing clear and conspicuous disclosures of what consumers are getting into. Once subscribed, consumers report serious difficulty canceling Asana Rebel subscriptions. The cancellation process involves confusing interfaces, repeated confirmation requests, and ineffective cancellation mechanisms.

What Are “Dark Patterns”?

According to the complaint, Asana Rebel uses “dark patterns”—user interface tricks that manipulate consumers into taking actions they wouldn’t have chosen to do absent those dark patterns. The dark patterns Asana Rebel uses include complicated navigation menus that make it hard to find cancellation options, and requiring multiple requests to confirm cancellation before it is accepted.

Who Is Eligible to Join the Asana Rebel Lawsuit?

If you have been charged by Asana Rebel without your consent, had trouble canceling an Asana Rebel subscription, or been denied a refund promised by Asana Rebel, you may be eligible to join this lawsuit. There is no cost or obligation to participate.

Contact a Class Action Attorney

If you were affected by Asana Rebel’s alleged illegal subscription practices or struggled to cancel, you are not alone! WMP is currently speaking with affected consumers nationwide. To speak with a class action attorney and receive a free case evaluation, click here, call (914) 775-8862, or email us at case@wittelslaw.com.

To read the class action complaint, click here.

Federal Appeals Court Agrees CleanChoice Energy Cannot Force Customer into Arbitration

On August 27, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed a ruling from the Southern District of New York that energy company CleanChoice Energy, Inc. cannot force consumers out of court by silently sending them additional terms containing an arbitration clause after the contract has been signed.

Wittels McInturff Palikovic and co-counsel Finkelstein Blankinship Frei-Pearson & Garber LLP filed a class action lawsuit against CleanChoice in New York federal court in November 2023. The case alleges CleanChoice used deceptive pricing and breached its contracts, causing customers to overpay for electricity. The lawsuit also claims CleanChoice misled consumers by falsely promising to supply “green” energy and instead supplying the same, standard “brown” energy consumers could have obtained from their regulated utility companies.

Rather than account for its practices in open court, CleanChoice tried to force customers into private arbitration. The company argued that one of the plaintiffs had agreed to arbitration by continuing to pay her bills after CleanChoice silently mailed her a document containing new terms (including an arbitration clause), even though the original contract she signed had no such provision.

A federal judge sided with the consumer, allowing the case to proceed in court. CleanChoice appealed this decision, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the lower court’s ruling, confirming that a company can’t force customers into arbitration by silently mailing them new terms after the initial contract is signed.

If you were an CleanChoice customer who was charged excessive electricity rates or deceived by CleanChoice’s “green” energy program, we urge you to contact a class action attorney at WMP for a free case evaluation.  Should a lawsuit be brought, there is no cost or fee involved in joining the case.  You can contact us by clicking here, calling (914) 775-8862, or emailing us at case@wittelslaw.com.

WMP Files $50 Million Class Action Lawsuit Against ExpressVPN

Wittels McInturff Palikovic (WMP) has filed a class action lawsuit against ExpressVPN in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Civil Action No. 1:25-cv-08121) on behalf of ExpressVPN customers who were charged for illegal recurring subscriptions and prevented from canceling those subscriptions due to obstructive and exceedingly difficult cancellation processes.

What Is the ExpressVPN Lawsuit About?

The lawsuit alleges that ExpressVPN uses deceptive auto-renewal practices to trap consumers into recurring paid subscriptions without providing clear and conspicuous disclosures of what consumers are getting into. Once subscribed, consumers report serious difficulty canceling ExpressVPN subscriptions. The cancellation process involves confusing interfaces, repeated confirmation requests, and ineffective cancellation mechanisms.

What Are “Dark Patterns”?

According to the complaint, ExpressVPN uses “dark patterns”—user interface tricks that manipulate consumers into taking actions they wouldn’t have chosen to do absent those dark patterns. The dark patterns ExpressVPN uses include misleading prices, complicated navigation menus that make it hard to find cancellation options, and requiring multiple requests to confirm cancellation before it is accepted.

Who Is Eligible to Join the ExpressVPN Lawsuit?

If you have been charged by ExpressVPN without your consent, had trouble canceling an ExpressVPN subscription, or been denied a refund promised by ExpressVPN, you may be eligible to join this lawsuit. There is no cost or obligation to participate.

Contact a Class Action Attorney

If you were affected by ExpressVPN’s alleged illegal subscription practices, you are not alone! WMP is currently speaking with affected consumers nationwide. To speak with a class action attorney and receive a free case evaluation, click here, call (914) 775-8862, or email us at case@wittelslaw.com.

To read the class action complaint, please click here. To learn more about our other consumer protection efforts, click here.

Federal Judge Appoints WMP Interim Class Counsel in Class Action against HOP Energy

On May 17, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznick of the Southern District of New York appointed WMP as interim co-lead class counsel in WMP’s class actions against HOP Energy, LLC for breaching its contract to supply home heating oil to consumers in eight states. 

 Courts designate interim class counsel “to act on behalf of a putative class before determining whether to certify the action as a class action.”  Where there are overlapping, duplicative, or competing suits pending in other courts, “the Court may find it necessary to appoint interim class counsel ‘to safeguard the interests of the class.’” 

 In this case, the Court noted a class action pending against HOP in federal court in Pennsylvania and HOP’s claims that the Pennsylvania case overlaps with WMP’s cases.  Because the rights of the classes in the New York cases may be impacted by a settlement in the Pennsylvania case, the Court found it necessary to “protect” the classes in WMP’s cases by representing those consumers “in any settlement involving” the Pennsylvania case.

The Court further highlighted the WMP (and co-counsel Shub & Johns LLC) are well-qualified to protect the interests of the class members in WMP’s cases.  In particular, the Court found that WMP “are experienced class action attorneys, who have litigated large-scale consumer class actions,” and specifically noted WMP’s experience in “deceptive energy practices” litigation.  The Court also recognized WMP’s efforts in the cases against HOP to date, including successfully defeating a motion to dismiss and motion to stay and bifurcate discovery, as well as efforts to obtain documents from HOP to prosecute the class claims.  The Court further noted that WMP was willing and able to commit the resources necessary for the cases against HOP.

To read a copy of the interim class counsel order, click here.

WMP Files $100 Million Class Action Lawsuits Against NordVPN

Wittels McInturff Palikovic has filed class actions against NordVPN in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Civil Action No. 24-2462) and Western District of North Carolina (Civil Action No. 24-277) on behalf of NordVPN’s customers nationwide.

The class action alleges that NordVPN uses deceptive and illegal “automatic renewal” practices to dupe customers into unknowingly paying for unwanted, pricey subscriptions to the NordVPN virtual private network and other services.  The lawsuit further alleges that NordVPN’s practices, including its alleged practice of intentionally making it difficult for consumers to cancel their subscriptions once enrolled in NordVPN, constitute “dark patterns,” which are deceptive design practices that aim to manipulate consumers into taking certain actions and exploit known frailties in human cognitive processing.  As a result, the lawsuit alleges that NordVPN customers paid tens of millions of dollars more than they would have if NordVPN had not used deceptive and illegal automatic renewal practices.

If you were a NordVPN customer who was charged for a subscription that you did not want, we urge you to contact a class action attorney at WMP for a free case evaluation.  Should a lawsuit be brought, there is no cost or fee involved in joining the case.  You can contact us by clicking here, calling (914) 775-8862, or emailing us at case@wittelslaw.com.

To read the class action complaints, click here (California) or here (North Carolina).

WMP Files Class Action Lawsuit Against Eligo Energy

Wittels McInturff Palikovic has filed a class action against Eligo Energy, LLC and Eligo Energy NY, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 24 Civ. 1260) on behalf of Defendants’ energy customers nationwide. 

The class action alleges that Eligo used deceptive and bad faith pricing practices for its electricity and natural gas offerings.  Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that although Eligo promises in its form contract that its energy rates will be “calculated on a monthly basis in response to market pricing, transportation costs, and other market price factors,” the company instead assesses excessive and varying rates that have resulted in customers paying millions of dollars more than they would have had Eligo set rates according to its contract.

If you were an Eligo customer who was charged excessive electricity or natural gas rates, we urge you to contact a class action attorney at WMP for a free case evaluation.  Should a lawsuit be brought, there is no cost or fee involved in joining the case.  You can contact us by clicking here , calling (914) 775-8862, or emailing us at case@wittelslaw.com.

To read the class action complaint, click here.

New York Federal Judge Certifies Class of 120,000 XOOM Customers for Alleged Energy Overcharges

On August 31, 2023, U.S. Court District Judge Allyne R. Ross certified a class of 124,530 XOOM customers who claim the company overcharged them for residential and small business electricity and natural gas service.  The Class alleges that XOOM’s overcharges breached its contracts with its New York customers.

Wittels McInturff Palikovic initially filed a class action lawsuit against XOOM in April 2018, alleging that XOOM failed to honor its promise in its New York contracts to charge energy rates “based on XOOM’s actual and estimated supply costs.” 

Among the Court’s rulings on Plaintiff’s motion for class certification, Judge Ross found that the disputes between Plaintiff and XOOM could be decided “in one stroke” at trial and therefore the case was suited to be tried as a class action. 

On June 20, 2024, the Court reiterated its August 2023 decision and denied XOOM’s motion to decertify the Class, allowing the case to continue to proceed as a class action.

These rulings are important victories for the New Yorkers damaged by XOOM’s broken promises.  For a copy of the class certification ruling, click here.  For a copy of the decertification ruling, click here.  For a copy of the Complaint, click here.

For more information, contact us.

New York Federal Court Judge Rebuffs NY Paving and Sends Case to Trial for 100+ Pavers Denied Millions in Overtime

Southern District of New York Judge Andrew L. Carter denies company’s decertification motion and allows case to proceed to trial for more than a hundred hard-working pavers owed millions of dollars in unpaid overtime for showing up before dawn to load trucks and drive to the jobsites.

WMP Files $50+ Million Class Action Lawsuit Against NY’s Largest Beer Distributor Manhattan Beer and CEO Simon Bergson for Fraudulent Bottle Deposit Charges

For more information or to join this case, contact us by clicking here, calling (914) 775-8862, or emailing us at case@wittelslaw.com.

On February 18, 2022, WMP filed a class action lawsuit in New York Federal Court to recover tens of millions of dollars for consumers victimized by Manhattan Beer’s illegal billing scheme.  

The suit describes how the beer giant boosts profits by adding hidden surcharges to invoices for top-selling brands like Corona, Coors, and Mike’s Hard Lemonade. 

Specifically, the company uses deceptive invoices to dupe small businesses into paying bottle deposit charges that are higher than what the law allows.  Adding insult to injury, the lawsuit alleges that the beer giant only surcharges its smaller mom and pop customers but not larger customers like supermarket chains.

“Manhattan Beer’s CEO Simon Bergson likes to boast that his company provides ‘best-in-class service’ to its customers,” says lead lawyer Steven L. Wittels.  “But you can’t be best if you rip off your customers by collecting millions a year in sham bottle deposit charges,” he adds.

“This isn’t the first time Manhattan Beer has been caught red-handed hurting the little guy,” continues partner J. Burkett McInturff.  “A Federal judge recently ruled that Manhattan Beer makes illegal deductions from its workers’ wages in another class action our firm brought against the company.” 

With over one billion dollars in annual revenue, and sales of more than 45 million cases of beer and hard beverages a year, the millions Manhattan Beer reaps from its bottle deposit scam translates to even higher profits for company executives.

“Let’s just say that’s a lot of beer money,” adds lead class lawyer Steven L. Wittels, “and the small businesses Manhattan Beer stole it from would like it back.”

To read the Class Action Complaint, click here.

To contact us about this case, click here.