Giants Become 3rd MLB Team Sued Over ‘Junk Fees’ Since September

The San Francisco Giants are accused of charging hidden “junk fees” that illegally inflated ticket costs and weren’t disclosed until checkout, marking the third MLB team sued over similar allegations in the past five months.

The proposed class action, filed in California federal court, alleges that the Giants “systematically cheated fans out of millions of dollars” over the course of many years through false advertising of ticket prices. It claims the class includes “hundreds of thousands” of consumers who were deceived into spending more than advertised for tickets. 

Although the team stopped charging these fees by July 2024, after the passage of a California state law prohibiting them, “they have not refunded fans the millions of dollars in Junk Fees that those fans have been charged,” the suit says.

The named plaintiff in the case, Juan Flores, bought two tickets for a game between the Giants and Padres in March 2024 that were advertised as costing $10 apiece. Once he got to the checkout page, additional “convenience” and “processing” fees were added, the suit says, upping the total price to $29—a 45% increase over what was advertised.

The pressure on him to complete the purchase was amped up by a countdown clock that appeared on the webpage that gave him limited time to review all information, input his payment information, and read and agree to terms and conditions.

Had he known about the fees before the countdown clock page, Flores “would not have purchased the specific tickets he purchased and instead would have attempted to buy tickets for different seats or from another seller at a lower total price.”

The suit does not include a specific amount in damages being sought, though it demands the Giants “pay back the unlawfully charged junk fees.”

The Giants are the third MLB team hit with a similar suit since September—each case alleges violations of state laws and features different attorneys. On Jan. 16, the Red Sox were sued in Massachusetts federal court over false advertising that has allegedly “cost ticket purchasers millions of dollars in total.” That suit, a proposed class action that also names Fenway Sports Group as a defendant, notes that the Red Sox typically charge a $7 “order” fee—“it does not cost the Red Sox $7 to process each electronic ticket order.” The Red Sox are accused of imposing these fees through “at least” the end of 2024.

A representative for the Red Sox tells Front Office Sports “while we don’t comment on pending litigation, we have always complied with applicable state and federal laws.”

The Nationals are also fighting a proposed class action filed in September in a Washington, D.C., federal court by a woman who claims the team charged junk fees for years. That suit says the team “cheated customers out of millions of dollars.”

Sports is not the only area where junk fees have caused consumers headaches. The issue came up in 2024 when tickets for Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour soared into the stratosphere, causing the Biden-era Department of Justice to probe Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation. In December 2024, the Federal Trade Commission announced a final “junk fees rule” prohibiting such tactics in the live-event ticketing and hotel industries.

The lawsuits, which allege violations of consumer protection laws already on the books, are a start—but enforcement is the real issue, says Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at the Groundwork Collaborative, a D.C.-based economic think tank.

“Violations are rampant,” says Jacquez, who previously worked at the National Economic Council under the Biden Administration. “It’s hard to pin these guys down if they don’t believe there will be any ramifications on the back end.”

That could change if more lawsuits pile up or one of the cases results in a major settlement or a large damages award—outcomes that may spur movement from the federal government.

“There are a lot of sports fans in Congress,” he tells FOS.

Representatives for the Giants and Nationals did not immediately respond to requests for comment.