FanDuel & DraftKings Hit With Class Action Alleging ‘Addictive’ Betting Design
Two New York bettors have launched a sweeping federal class action lawsuit against the leading brands in American sports betting.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court, alleges that FanDuel and DraftKings deliberately designed their platforms to psychologically engineer users into betting and losing more.
The complaint names Betfair Interactive US LLC (which operates FanDuel Sportsbook), FanDuel Inc., FanDuel Group Parent LLC, Flutter Entertainment PLC, and DraftKings Inc. as defendants.
Plaintiffs John Farley and Michael Fox, both New York residents, bring the action individually and on behalf of a proposed nationwide class that could potentially include hundreds of thousands of consumers.
The lawsuit asserts violations of New York’s General Business Law, including its ban on unfair and deceptive trade practices, as well as claims of negligence and unjust enrichment.
High Frequency Betting
At the heart of the complaint, the plaintiffs accuse FanDuel and DraftKings of turning sports betting from an occasional, event-based pastime into what the filing describes as a “high-frequency, always-available, app-driven product engineered to keep customers wagering continuously.”
The lawsuit argues that contemporary sports betting sites offer a very different product than traditional sports books. The complaint focuses on in-play live betting products that encourage rapid, high-frequency gambling.
It specifically cites same-game parlays, player props, quickly changing live odds, and a constant stream of new betting prompts. The plaintiffs claim that these features maintain engagement and remove natural pauses that would otherwise give gamblers time to reflect, reassess, or stop.
Multiple states and some federal legislators have floated the idea of banning some of these types of bets.
The Impact of Promotions
The lawsuit also emphasizes how promotions encourage increased gaming activity. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants use a variety of sophisticated incentives, such as profit boost bonus bets, “bet and get” offers, money-back offers, and cashback deals, and that they time and target these offers to encourage additional deposits and wagering.
The complaint claims that the operators use customer data, betting histories, engagement metrics, and behavioural patterns to decide exactly when to send promotions and to whom. It also alleges that the companies gave special attention to users who had recently suffered losses or showed signs of escalating activity.
The lawsuit further alleges that these promotions mislead users. It claims that some offers frame betting as “less risky” when using profit boosts or “no sweat” bets, creating a false impression. According to the complaint, the companies design these offers to make users feel protected enough to continue gambling while the house maintains its built-in advantage.
Plaintiff Michael Fox specifically highlights receiving a “profit boost” offer that claimed to boost his winning odds by up to 50%, yet his outcomes did not improve despite the inducement.
Contrast Between Depositing and Withdrawing
The complaint highlights what the plaintiffs describe as an intentional imbalance between depositing and withdrawing funds. The plaintiffs argue that platforms make deposits instant and frictionless while adding barriers to withdrawals.
The lawsuit claims that platforms often delay access to funds and slow down the withdrawal process, increasing the likelihood that users keep money within the betting ecosystem and eventually wager it.
The plaintiffs also argue that making deposits just a tap away removes natural checkpoints where bettors might otherwise pause and reconsider, especially after a losing session.
The Same Patterns From Two Plaintiffs
The named plaintiffs share personal insights into their betting experiences. John Farley, who mainly used FanDuel, estimates that he deposited about $11,000 over roughly four years.
He funded a significant portion of these deposits through credit cards, which the complaint states made continued betting easier and amplified the financial consequences of his activity. He also found the constant stream of promotional communication difficult to resist.
Michael Fox lost about $5,000 in less than a year, primarily on DraftKings. He explains that he continued betting in an attempt to chase losses. As his losses increased, he experienced significant anxiety and financial strain and began hiding his betting activity from his partner.
What the Plaintiffs Are Seeking
The lawsuit asserts two alleged violations of New York’s primary consumer protection statutes, which prohibit unfair, deceptive, and abusive business practices and false advertising. The third count alleges negligence, claiming that the defendants owed users a duty of care in how they designed and operated their platforms. The fourth count alleges unjust enrichment, and the plaintiffs seek to force the defendants to disgorge profits generated from the alleged misconduct.
The plaintiffs seek actual damages, statutory damages, and treble damages where permitted under state law. They also request restitution, disgorgement, injunctive relief requiring the defendants to change their practices, attorney fees, and costs. The lawsuit invokes the Class Action Fairness Act, claiming that the total amount in controversy exceeds $5 million across a class of more than 100 members.
Growing Scrutiny
The lawsuit arrives at a time when public and regulatory scrutiny of the sports betting industry continues to intensify. The industry has expanded significantly across the U.S. since the federal ban ended in 2018.
FanDuel and DraftKings dominate the market and spend heavily on advertising and promotions to acquire and retain users. They are also increasingly involved in lobbying at the federal and state level.
Critics, public health advocates, and some lawmakers have raised concerns for years about the industry’s marketing practices, particularly its heavy promotional spending and the addictive nature of mobile betting apps.
If the lawsuit succeeds, it could become one of the largest consumer class actions ever brought against the online sports betting industry.
Players trust our reporting due to our commitment to unbiased and professional evaluations of the iGaming sector. We track hundreds of platforms and industry updates daily to ensure our news feed and leaderboards reflect the most recent market shifts. With nearly two decades of experience within iGaming, our team provides a wealth of expert knowledge. This long-standing expertise enables us to deliver thorough, reliable news and guidance to our readers.
Latest News
