“Had the plaintiff been provided this notice in a timely manner, he would have canceled his membership and not gone forward with the auto-renewal,” states the complaint filed by Russel George against Costco Wholesale Corporation. This lawsuit, which has garnered attention for its implications on consumer rights, centers around the retailer’s practices regarding automatic membership renewals.
George’s class-action lawsuit, filed in California, alleges that Costco failed to notify him adequately before automatically renewing his membership. According to the complaint, this oversight constitutes a violation of California’s consumer protection regulations, which mandate that businesses send renewal notices between 15 and 45 days prior to the renewal date. Instead, George claims that Costco sent renewal notice emails a full 60 days before charging members’ credit cards, a timeframe he argues is insufficient for members to take action.
The Automatic Renewal Law of California, which took effect in July 2025, was designed to protect consumers from unexpected charges by requiring clear communication about auto-renewals. George’s lawsuit challenges not only the timing of Costco’s notifications but also the adequacy of the information provided. The complaint asserts that the renewal notice was missing critical details, such as the length and terms of the renewal, which are essential for informed consumer decision-making.
Costco members currently have the option to cancel their memberships by calling a toll-free number or visiting a physical warehouse location. However, the lawsuit suggests that these processes do not comply with California law, which aims to simplify cancellation methods for consumers. “Due to Costco’s untimely and deficient auto-renewal notice, the plaintiff was deprived of information he was statutorily entitled to that would have notified him of the upcoming auto-renewal and provided him with methods of cancellation,” the complaint further elaborates.
The membership structure at Costco includes a standard annual membership priced at $65 and an executive membership at $130. With millions of members relying on these services, the outcome of this lawsuit could have far-reaching implications for Costco’s business practices and the broader subscription industry. The Federal Trade Commission had previously attempted to implement national ‘click-to-cancel’ rules in 2024, but these efforts were struck down in July 2025, leaving states like California to navigate their own consumer protection measures.
As the case unfolds, a preliminary hearing is scheduled for June 2026, where the court will examine the merits of George’s claims. The lawsuit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, damages for George and other class members, and a jury trial. The outcome may not only affect Costco but could also set a precedent for how auto-renewal practices are handled across various industries.
In a broader context, this lawsuit reflects ongoing regulatory efforts to address auto-renewal practices in the subscription industry. As consumers become increasingly aware of their rights, businesses may need to adapt their practices to ensure compliance with evolving regulations. As George’s case progresses, it will be crucial to observe how the court interprets California’s consumer protection laws in relation to auto-renewals.
