Consumer backlash over printer disabling sparks $5 million (€4.74 million) class action lawsuit in California.
HP is facing a $5m (€4.74 million) class-action lawsuit in California over allegations that it used unfair practices to lock consumers into its controversial Instant Ink subscription programme. The case, filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, claims that HP disabled both printers and ink cartridges for customers who cancelled their subscriptions, violating consumer rights.
The lawsuit centres on allegations brought by Donald Hall, an attorney and HP printer owner, who accuses the company of deploying a so-called “kill switch” to force customers back into the subscription service. Hall contends that this practice breaches contract terms and amounts to deceptive business conduct.
Hall, acting on behalf of himself and other affected customers, asserts that HP’s Instant Ink programme was marketed as a flexible service, allowing users to cancel at any time. The subscription service monitors a customer’s ink usage, automatically ships replacements, and charges a recurring fee. However, the suit claims that upon cancellation, Hall’s printer ceased functioning, displaying a message that the ink cartridges were unusable unless the printer was re-enrolled in the program.
The case alleges that HP forces consumers to re-enrol in Instant Ink for a mandatory 30-day period to regain printer functionality. Even after Hall complied with this requirement, the lawsuit claims, the cartridges he had purchased while subscribed remained disabled.
According to Hall, HP’s actions demonstrate an egregious misuse of technology, leaving customers without access to devices and supplies they legally own. The lawsuit argues that this conduct represents not only a breach of contract but also fraud through omission, as HP failed to disclose the existence of the disabling mechanism.
The lawsuit seeks damages, restitution, and injunctive relief to prevent HP from continuing these practices.
