StubHub Refund

This docket consolidates consumer class actions alleging that an online ticket-resale marketplace unlawfully changed its refund policy for events cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic, abandoning a previously advertised guarantee of cash refunds for cancelled events in favor of account credits worth a premium over the original purchase price, over customer objection. Centralized in the Northern District of California in 2020, the docket has narrowed to 6 pending actions, with the underlying company having already reached separate settlements with multiple state attorneys general addressing the same conduct outside this federal litigation.

For a funder, this is a small-dollar, aggregated consumer-protection matter, structurally similar to other pandemic-era consumer refund disputes: individual purchaser damages are modest, and value depends on class-wide aggregation, if a class is certified, under state consumer-protection theories, with the prior state attorney-general settlements providing a useful reference point for how regulators and the company itself have already valued similar claims outside this docket.

Given the docket's small remaining scale and the parallel regulatory settlement activity that has already addressed much of the same underlying conduct, this is a modest firm-level litigation cost financing question at most rather than a substantial standalone opportunity. Criterica Capital's commercial litigation finance line could apply to a firm's remaining litigation costs in this docket, sized appropriately against its narrow scope. A structure and litigation brief on the current procedural posture is also available.

Pre-settlement funding is a non-recourse purchase of a portion of the proceeds of a pending legal claim — not a loan. If the case does not result in a recovery, nothing is owed. Rates, fees, and repayment terms are disclosed in full in the funding agreement, which the applicant’s attorney reviews before signing. Availability and terms vary by state.