About

FTC Adds Five States as Co-Plaintiffs in Hims & Hers Privacy and Billing Suit

Published
Score
18

Why it matters

The Federal Trade Commission filed a first amended complaint on November 10, 2026, in the Northern District of California against Hims & Hers Health, Inc., the company behind Hims.com and ForHers.com. The amendment adds Arizona, Florida, Nebraska, Ohio and Wisconsin as co-plaintiffs, joining Utah and California, for seven state co-plaintiffs alongside the FTC. It also adds seven counts, bringing the total to 16. The complaint alleges that Hims shared consumers' sensitive health information with third-party advertising platforms, including Meta and Snap, despite promising privacy. It further alleges that the company charged for prescriptions almost immediately after intake and made cancellation difficult, which the FTC says violates the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act. The FTC sued on July 29, 2026, and Utah and California, the latter through Los Angeles County Counsel, joined that suit.

No ruling or settlement has been reported, and the FTC's case page lists the matter as pending. As of a September 30 report, no Hims & Hers lawsuit has produced a settlement or refund program. Private litigation is also active. Doe v. Hims & Hers Health, Inc., a proposed class action filed July 30, was brought by two users. Pearson v. Hims & Hers Health, filed August 14, names seven customer plaintiffs and identifies Meta, Google, Snap and Amplitude as recipients of data. A securities class action, Velanki, covers investors who bought stock between August 4, 2025, and July 29, 2026.

The FTC's theory targets pixels, server-side conversion tools, customer-list uploads and privacy-related marketing statements on company websites. Those tracking practices are common in e-commerce. The liability rests on what the company promised users about privacy, not on the tools being unlawful. Lead-generation intake forms carry particular risk, since a medical or financial answer can be transmitted as soon as a pixel fires on submission. Attorneys advising online retailers and lead generators should audit pixels on intake and checkout pages, compare privacy statements against actual data flows, and review subscription billing and cancellation paths. Multistate participation also matters. Resolving the case with the FTC alone may not end exposure, because co-plaintiffs keep independent claims under their own consumer protection laws.

Sources

mail Subscribe to Health Care email updates

Primary sources. No fluff. Straight to your inbox.

Also on LawSnap