ARTICLE
3 September 2026

AMC Faces Class Action Over Hidden ​“Convenience Fees”

KD
Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Contributor

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP is an AmLaw 200, Chambers ranked, full-service law firm of more than 350 attorneys and other professionals. For more than 180 years, Kelley Drye has provided legal counsel carefully connected to our client’s business strategies and has measured success by the real value we create.
A Pennsylvania moviegoer has filed a class action lawsuit against AMC Theatres, alleging the company engages in deceptive pricing practices by adding mandatory convenience fees late in the online ticket purchase process. The case highlights the growing tension between state-by-state compliance approaches and uniform pricing transparency standards, with potential implications for how companies handle fee disclosures across different jurisdictions.
United States Consumer Protection

Last week, a Pennsylvania moviegoer filed a class action lawsuit against AMC arguing that the theater company charges deceptive “junk fees” when consumers buy tickets online.

According to the complaint, AMC displays a price for each ticket at the beginning of the purchase flow. Later in the flow, AMC adds a “Convenience Fee,” which is mandatory unless a consumer instead elects to pay an annual $17.99 fee to join “AMC Stubs Premiere,” the company’s loyalty program. 

The plaintiff alleges that in other jurisdictions (such as New York) where it is explicitly required by law to do so, AMC displays its all-in price from the start and discloses its fees upfront. Because Pennsylvania does not have a similar law, customers in that state get a different experience. Among other things, the plaintiffs seek damages, refunds of the convenience fees, and an injunction to stop AMC’s current fee practices.

As more states pass laws to address how companies display fees, companies have to decide whether to approach compliance on a state-by-state basis or to try to comply with the most restrictive standard across all states. The outcome of this case could impact how companies think about the former strategy.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More