Dave's Class Action Lawsuit: 600+ Users Demand Accountability Over Hidden Fees and Broken Promises

Over 600 consumers have escalated their grievances into formal arbitration claims against Dave Operating LLC, the mobile financial services platform that went public on NASDAQ in 2022. At the heart of the dave class action lawsuit allegations: systematic deception around its flagship ExtraCash earned wage access product, which marketed “instant cash advances with zero hidden fees” but delivered something far different.

What Went Wrong: The Pattern of Deception

Users report a consistent playbook. Dave promised instant advances up to $500 with transparent pricing, yet the reality proved far messier. According to filings and regulatory scrutiny, the company:

• Routinely offered users far less than advertised, with smaller amounts withheld unless customers paid an undisclosed “Express Fee”
• Charged mandatory monthly subscription fees of $1 without clear upfront disclosure
• Misrepresented “tip” payments as charitable donations, when the vast majority was retained by Dave rather than donated
• Made account cancellation deliberately difficult, causing recurring charges to persist even after users stopped using the app

The situation escalated beyond consumer complaints when two major regulators took action. In November 2024, the Federal Trade Commission filed its own lawsuit alleging widespread misrepresentation. One month later, the U.S. Department of Justice filed an amended complaint, accusing Dave of specifically targeting financially vulnerable consumers with deceptive marketing and unfair fee structures.

Why the Dave Class Action Lawsuit Matters Beyond One Company

This arbitration wave reflects a broader reckoning within the fintech space. The “neobank” model—which packages traditional banking services into sleek mobile apps with bold marketing claims—has exploded in popularity. Yet critics argue it often replicates the predatory playbook of traditional finance while obscuring it behind polished UI design.

Dave’s case exposes the gap between promised convenience and actual user experience. Financially struggling customers seeking quick cash access became trapped in subscription cycles and hidden fees, precisely the opposite of what the company marketed.

What’s Next

With over 600 arbitration claims filed, Dave faces a significant legal and reputational challenge. The combination of FTC enforcement, DOJ complaints, and mass consumer arbitration suggests regulators and users alike are demanding accountability from the neobank sector.

The outcome could reshape how financial technology companies market earned wage access products and structure their fee models moving forward.