Meta appears to be in the hot seat again after Facebook users are reopening a case that was filed a while back, which accuses the firm of actively encouraging and soliciting scammers to advertise on the platform.
The users who hail from Oregon and Nebraska were identified as Christopher Calise and Anastasia Groschen. Each Facebook member says they’ve lost plenty of funds when they tried to buy things online through the app.
Therefore, they’re making appeals to the 9th Circuit Court to bring back their claims to life but they are yet to put forward their arguments here.
The battle first came to light last year. Both citizens set forth a new class action in the form of a complaint that the app is ready to facilitate as well as encourage scammers to produce more ads that end up taking advantage of vulnerable victims that fall into their trap.
Calise, one of the members of the case, says he went as far as losing $49 when he opted to buy a vehicle assembly kit that was promoted on Facebook. Despite paying with a debit card, he claims the stock never arrived. And for that reason, he could never achieve a refund.
On the other hand, the other active member making the allegations says she lost an amount of nearly $31 right after she tried to buy a toddler-themed activity board. She says she fell into the trap of clicking on an ad across the app for this particular product.
What she received, in the end, was nothing like what she was promised. It was a low-quality wooden puzzle instead of the glamorous activity board shown and spoken about in the ad.
Facebook tried its best to dismiss the case during its early stage, citing protection from any liabilities under the court’s Section 230. This safeguards such firms from the behavior shown by third parties such as advertisers.
The users who hail from Oregon and Nebraska were identified as Christopher Calise and Anastasia Groschen. Each Facebook member says they’ve lost plenty of funds when they tried to buy things online through the app.
Therefore, they’re making appeals to the 9th Circuit Court to bring back their claims to life but they are yet to put forward their arguments here.
The battle first came to light last year. Both citizens set forth a new class action in the form of a complaint that the app is ready to facilitate as well as encourage scammers to produce more ads that end up taking advantage of vulnerable victims that fall into their trap.
Calise, one of the members of the case, says he went as far as losing $49 when he opted to buy a vehicle assembly kit that was promoted on Facebook. Despite paying with a debit card, he claims the stock never arrived. And for that reason, he could never achieve a refund.
On the other hand, the other active member making the allegations says she lost an amount of nearly $31 right after she tried to buy a toddler-themed activity board. She says she fell into the trap of clicking on an ad across the app for this particular product.
What she received, in the end, was nothing like what she was promised. It was a low-quality wooden puzzle instead of the glamorous activity board shown and spoken about in the ad.
Facebook tried its best to dismiss the case during its early stage, citing protection from any liabilities under the court’s Section 230. This safeguards such firms from the behavior shown by third parties such as advertisers.
