The FTC’s action against Pearl AI highlights risks of deceptive subscriptions, with Latino consumers and small businesses among the most impacted by hidden fees.
The Federal Trade Commission has filed a lawsuit against Pearl, the artificial intelligence company that operates JustAnswer.com, accusing it of widespread consumer deception through so-called “dark patterns”—design tactics that allegedly mislead users into costly recurring subscriptions without clear consent.
According to the FTC, the case centers on how Pearl markets and delivers its core service. JustAnswer positions itself as an online platform that connects users with professionals such as lawyers, doctors, mechanics, and accountants. Through a network of landing pages like AskALawyer.com, users searching for quick answers are offered what appears to be a low-cost, one-time consultation—often advertised at $1 or $5.
The FTC alleges that once consumers enter their credit card information for this initial fee, they are automatically enrolled in a monthly subscription that can cost as much as $79 per month. The agency claims this enrollment happens without clear, informed consent and that key pricing information is buried in fine print or obscured by interface design.
The complaint also argues that Pearl made it unnecessarily difficult for customers to cancel the service or even realize they were being charged repeatedly. These practices, the FTC says, are part of a broader pattern of “subscription traps,” in which companies rely on confusing interfaces rather than customer choice to retain revenue.
Notably, the lawsuit names Andy Kurtzig, JustAnswer’s founder and CEO, alleging that he failed to stop or correct practices that harmed consumers. The inclusion of individual leadership underscores the FTC’s increasing willingness to pursue accountability beyond corporate entities.
Why Pearl and JustAnswer Matter
Pearl is not a fringe player. JustAnswer has operated for years as a widely used digital platform for on-demand professional advice. For many users, especially those without easy access to traditional legal or medical consultations, services like JustAnswer promise speed, convenience, and lower upfront costs.
That accessibility has particular relevance for Latino households and small business owners, many of whom rely on online platforms for basic legal guidance, immigration-related questions, tax issues, or contractor advice. Digital services can reduce barriers of time, cost, and language—but only if pricing and terms are transparent.
Consumer advocates have long warned that communities operating with tighter budgets are more vulnerable to unexpected recurring charges. A $79 monthly fee can quickly become a financial burden for families or entrepreneurs who believed they were paying for a single consultation.
A Broader Regulatory Signal
The FTC’s lawsuit against Pearl fits into a wider enforcement push against deceptive digital design. In recent years, regulators have increased scrutiny of companies that blur the line between one-time payments and subscriptions, particularly in industries powered by automation and AI.
The case also raises important questions about how artificial intelligence is used in customer-facing roles. When chatbots guide users through payment flows, design choices can significantly influence consumer behavior—and regulators are signaling that automation does not excuse accountability.
As the case moves forward, it is likely to resonate beyond Pearl and JustAnswer. For consumers, it reinforces the need to read terms carefully. For tech companies and startups, including those serving Latino communities, it sends a clear message: growth built on confusion is increasingly a legal risk, not a business strategy.
The outcome could shape how digital advice platforms operate—and how trust is built or lost in an AI-driven economy.
