EvilCorporations.com
Corporate Accountability Project · Class Action Watch
TomoCredit, Inc. · Class Action · 2025-2026
TomoCredit Trapped 4 Million Users in a Credit Score Scam They Could Not Escape
A fintech company marketed itself as a lifeline for credit-invisible Americans, then made it nearly impossible to leave, continued charging fees for a product that did not work, and buried its terms in hidden documents users never saw.
● Critical Severity
TL;DR
TomoCredit built a product called TomoBoost and sold it to millions of people who were desperate to rebuild their credit. It promised instant score increases of 105 points or more and marketed itself as trusted by over 4 million users. What those users got instead: credit scores that did not move, reporting partnerships that had already been terminated by all three major credit bureaus, cancellation buttons that did not work, and charges that kept coming long after they begged for it to stop. People who could least afford to lose money were the ones losing it. This is not a bug. This is a business model.
Demand accountability. Share this story. Tell someone who almost signed up.
4M+
Users marketed to as “trusted” customers
105+
Credit points promised in advertising
858
BBB complaints filed against TomoCredit
671
BBB complaints TomoCredit ignored entirely
F
Better Business Bureau rating
$130/mo
VIP plan monthly cost at peak pricing
$980
Single charge attempt documented in user review
3
Major credit bureaus that terminated TomoCredit’s reporting access
Core Allegations
⚠️
▾
Core Allegations
What TomoCredit did · 8 points
| 01 | TomoCredit advertised a “105+ credit boost” and claimed its VIP plan delivered results “instantly,” knowing the product did not function as described for the overwhelming majority of users. | high |
| 02 | TomoCredit’s data-sharing partnerships with TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax were revoked by all three bureaus, yet the company continued accepting new sign-ups and monthly payments for a product that could no longer report to any major credit bureau. | high |
| 03 | TomoCredit enrolled users in automatic renewal programs without presenting the renewal terms clearly and conspicuously before collecting payment information, violating the California Automatic Renewal Law. | high |
| 04 | TomoCredit imposed a mandatory arbitration clause on anyone who merely visited its website, before they had read any terms, through a provision that treated passive browsing as binding legal consent. | high |
| 05 | TomoCredit designed its cancellation flow to obstruct users at every step: the cancel button was hidden beneath large upsell advertisements, the online flow was broken or non-functional, and a mandatory phone call was required before any cancellation could proceed. | high |
| 06 | After users successfully located and clicked the cancel button, TomoCredit required them to schedule a “free counseling call” before the cancellation could take effect, blocking online-only cancellation entirely. | high |
| 07 | Multiple users confirmed in public reviews that TomoCredit continued charging their cards for months and, in some cases, more than a year after cancellation had been requested, and that the company fought bank disputes filed to recover those charges. | high |
| 08 | TomoCredit rebranded its billing descriptor from “TOMOBOOST” to “BUILD YOUR CREDIT,” making it harder for consumers to recognize and dispute charges from the same company. | high |
💰
▾
Profit Over People
Revenue prioritized over delivering a real service · 6 points
| 01 | TomoCredit collected monthly fees ranging from $14.99 to $129.99 from users whose credit scores did not improve, and in many cases declined, while the company continued marketing success stories on its website. | high |
| 02 | TomoCredit reserved the right to unilaterally modify its terms of service, including its arbitration clause, simply by posting changes to its website, requiring no notice and no affirmative user consent to the updated terms. | high |
| 03 | When users attempted to cancel, TomoCredit deployed fear-based messaging warning them that their credit scores would drop significantly if they left, exploiting users’ anxieties to prevent churn. | high |
| 04 | TomoCredit’s cancellation page led users through a sequence of alternative plan offers at higher price points and longer durations before any cancellation option became visible, using dark patterns designed to exhaust users into staying. | medium |
| 05 | Several users reported that TomoCredit attempted to charge their cards up to five times per day and that the only way to stop charges was to cancel the credit card itself, effectively forcing users to disrupt their own credit relationships to escape. | high |
| 06 | TomoCredit denied refunds to users who had never received a working service, citing terms that prohibited refunds even when the advertised service was factually unavailable due to TomoCredit’s own loss of bureau reporting access. | high |
📉
▾
Economic Fallout
Financial harm to consumers · 5 points
| 01 | Users paid between $150 and $1,000 or more for a subscription that produced no measurable credit improvement, according to dozens of documented consumer complaints spanning 2023 through late 2025. | high |
| 02 | Users who filed successful bank disputes found that TomoCredit contested those disputes, and at least one user reported that TomoCredit attempted the same charge again exactly one year later after losing the original dispute. | high |
| 03 | Multiple users were forced to close their bank accounts entirely to stop unauthorized charges, a step that carries its own downstream financial and credit consequences for people already in vulnerable financial situations. | high |
| 04 | Users who received any credit reporting at all found that TomoCredit reported inaccurate data, including $0 credit limits and $0 balances, which provided no credit benefit and in some cases lowered their scores. | high |
| 05 | TomoCredit’s own terms barred arbitration on a class basis, meaning individual consumers with small claims had no practical legal avenue to recover their losses, a structural feature that insulated the company from collective accountability. | medium |
⚖️
▾
Corporate Accountability Failures
Non-existent customer service, no self-correction · 6 points
| 01 | The Better Business Bureau assigned TomoCredit an F rating after the company failed to respond to 671 out of 858 total complaints filed, a response rate below 22% on verified consumer harm reports. | high |
| 02 | TomoCredit’s customer support system consisted primarily of email, automated responses, and an 800-number for leaving voicemails. Dozens of users confirmed they received no human response after weeks or months of repeated contact attempts. | high |
| 03 | When users demanded removal of inaccurate credit data that TomoCredit had reported, the company’s support system warned them that closing the tradeline would hurt their score, then failed to remove the inaccurate data regardless of the user’s instructions. | high |
| 04 | At least one user reported that after creating a support ticket and challenging TomoCredit’s refusal to issue a refund, TomoCredit deleted the user’s support account, eliminating any record of the complaint and cutting off further communication. | high |
| 05 | Multiple users attempted to report TomoCredit to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau but found the company was not registered or traceable through standard regulatory databases, suggesting deliberate opacity in its corporate structure. | medium |
| 06 | The Terms and Conditions were not displayed prominently on the website. Users could only access them by knowing the direct URL to an AWS document or by scrolling to the very bottom of the page and locating a small hyperlink, a deliberate barrier to informed consent. | medium |
📣
▾
The PR Machine
How deceptive marketing kept the pipeline full · 4 points
| 01 | TomoCredit displayed fabricated or unverifiable testimonials on its pricing page claiming score boosts of 108 points while its actual product had no active reporting partnerships with any major credit bureau. | high |
| 02 | TomoCredit’s webpage title claimed its product could “Boost Your Credit Score 200+ Fast with AI,” a claim unsupported by any disclosed evidence and directly contradicted by hundreds of user reports of zero score movement. | high |
| 03 | The company displayed a countdown timer labeled “Special Deal Ending In” on its pricing page, a manufactured urgency tactic designed to rush consumers into purchases before they could research the product or read reviews. | medium |
| 04 | At least one user reported that TomoCredit had a negative Trustpilot review removed after it was posted, suggesting the company actively worked to suppress public documentation of harm on consumer review platforms. | medium |
📜
▾
Legal Minimalism
Weaponizing fine print to evade accountability · 5 points
| 01 | TomoCredit’s terms included a mandatory arbitration clause that stripped users of the right to sue in court or participate in any class action, effectively making individual losses too small to pursue and shielding the company from collective legal challenge. | high |
| 02 | The arbitration agreement was structured as illusory because TomoCredit retained the unilateral right to modify it at any time by posting changes to the website, with continued use of the site constituting acceptance, regardless of whether users saw the changes. | high |
| 03 | Terms of service applied to users who had never signed anything or clicked an agreement button: TomoCredit’s contract claimed that merely visiting the website or browsing the service constituted acceptance of all terms, including arbitration and class action waiver. | high |
| 04 | TomoCredit’s refund policy prohibited any refunds in its terms, a provision the complaint characterizes as unconscionable given that users were paying for a service the company was operationally unable to deliver at the time of purchase. | high |
| 05 | TomoCredit operated additional websites with different brand names that did not disclose their connection to TomoCredit, with the disclosure appearing only in fine print at the bottom of the page, creating the illusion of unrelated, legitimate services. | medium |
Customers in Their Own Words
Trustpilot · 1 Star · December 2025
ToMoi keeps trying to charge my card. I ended up filing a dispute with my card issuer. I won the dispute. Then exactly a year later TomoCredit has the balls to try and charge my card again for $979.99.
Arizona User · Verified Customer
BBB · 1 Star · December 2025
This company is unethical. I closed my account months ago, yet Tomo continues to attempt to charge my credit card. They are preying on a vulnerable population: people who came to them in an effort to rebuild their credit, and then they do this nonsense.
Elizabeth W. · BBB Verified Review
Trustpilot · 1 Star · December 2024
The Tomoboost product they are advertising doesn’t and can’t exist as their data sharing privileges have been revoked by TransUnion, Experian and Equifax, yet they are still advertising and accepting signups and payments.
Robert · Verified Customer · September 2024 subscriber
Trustpilot · 1 Star · November 2023
I BEEN TRYING TO CANCEL SINCE DECEMBER! EVERY TIME I TRY TO REACH OUT I GET AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE AND I’M STILL BEING HARASSED BY TEXTS SAYING AVOID TERMINATION. NOW I’M CONTACTING MY BANK AND REPLACING MY CARD!
Dess · Verified Customer
F
Better Business Bureau: Lowest Possible Rating
858 total complaints filed against TomoCredit as of the complaint date.
671 of those complaints went without any response from the company.
Failure to respond to over 78% of documented consumer harm reports.
Timeline of Documented Events
2021
Early users report being locked out of their accounts and unable to reach customer service. Some report dormant accounts being reactivated and charged years later without consent.
Late 2023
Volume of Trustpilot and BBB complaints begins escalating rapidly. Users describe cancellation attempts stretching 2 to 8 months with no resolution. Some resort to closing bank accounts.
Early 2024
Multiple users confirm that TomoCredit reported $0 credit limits and $0 balances to only one or two bureaus instead of three, making the reported tradeline functionally useless for credit building.
September 2024
At least one user discovers after signing up that TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax had all terminated their data-sharing partnerships with TomoCredit, meaning the company was selling a service it could not deliver.
September 2025
TomoCredit issues an updated Terms and Conditions document, including arbitration provisions. The company reserves the right to modify terms by website posting, without direct notice to users.
October 2025
Lead plaintiff William Geagley subscribes to TomoBoost Premium. He observes no credit improvement within the first billing cycle and attempts to cancel. His cancellation attempt fails repeatedly due to non-functional online cancellation tools.
December 2025
TomoCredit continues attempting to charge a user’s card for $979.99, one full year after that user won a bank dispute against the exact same charge.
January 15, 2026
Class action complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of William Geagley and all similarly situated consumers nationwide.
Direct Quotes from the Legal Record
QUOTE 1
Marketing claim vs. documented reality
Core Allegations
“TomoBoost: Boost Your Credit Score 200+ Fast with AI.”
💡 TomoCredit used this as its web page title while its reporting access had been cut off by all three major bureaus. Hundreds of users confirmed their scores did not move at all.
QUOTE 2
Automatic consent through website browsing
Legal Minimalism
“By accessing, inquiring, browsing and/or using the Tomocredit App, Tomocredit.com, TomoBoost.com, or the Services, you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and agree to be bound by the Terms of this Agreement.”
💡 This clause purports to bind anyone who simply visits the website, including to mandatory arbitration and class action waiver, before they have seen the terms or agreed to anything.
QUOTE 3
Unilateral right to change any term without notice
Legal Minimalism
“Tomocredit reserves the right to and may amend this Agreement at any time unilaterally and will notify you of any such changes by posting the revised Agreement on its website.”
💡 This provision made the entire contract illusory: TomoCredit could change any term, including the arbitration clause, at any time, with the only “notice” being a silent website update.
QUOTE 4
Fear tactics deployed to stop cancellations
Profit Over People
“We want to warn you that there is a high chance your credit score may decrease due to a closed line of credit. Are you sure you wish to continue with your cancellation?”
💡 This was TomoCredit’s scripted response to a user who had explicitly demanded removal of inaccurate data from their credit report. The company used fear of credit damage to discourage users from exercising their legal rights.
QUOTE 5
TomoCredit’s conduct described as a “conscious disregard” for rights
Accountability Failures
“TomoCredit’s conduct was: (a) intended to cause injury to the Plaintiff; (b) carried on with a high degree of despicable and conscious disregard of the Plaintiff’s rights; (c) a clear attempt to use the Plaintiff’s need for a boost in credit to hook them into an autorenewal subscription… that they cannot get out of.”
💡 This is the plaintiff’s attorneys’ formal characterization of TomoCredit’s conduct, filed in a federal court complaint. The pattern described here is the opposite of an accident.
QUOTE 6
Service already impossible to deliver at time of sale
Core Allegations
“The Tomoboost product they are advertising doesn’t and can’t exist as their data sharing privileges have been revoked by TransUnion, Experian and Equifax, yet they are still advertising and accepting signups and payments.”
💡 A documented customer review, quoted in the federal complaint, confirming that TomoCredit continued selling a product after the infrastructure required to deliver it had already been shut down.
Commentary
Did TomoCredit’s product ever actually work?
▾
For at least a significant portion of users, no. Multiple independent sources confirm that all three major credit bureaus, TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax, had revoked TomoCredit’s data-sharing agreements. Without those agreements, the company was operationally incapable of reporting credit data to any bureau. Despite this, it continued signing up new customers and collecting monthly fees. Some earlier users may have seen limited reporting before the partnerships were terminated, but the evidence indicates that the product was functionally non-existent for most of the period described in the complaint.
Who was most harmed by this?
▾
The people who signed up for TomoBoost were, by definition, people with damaged or limited credit who were trying to rebuild. They were the exact population least able to absorb repeated unauthorized charges, the stress of a broken cancellation process, and months of fighting to get their money back. TomoCredit targeted people’s financial desperation as a sales mechanism, then turned that same desperation into leverage when those people tried to leave. That is not an accident of design. That is a feature of the business model.
Is this lawsuit serious, and does it have merit?
▾
The complaint was filed in federal court by two law firms with documented class action experience. It cites specific California statutes, including the Automatic Renewal Law and the Unfair Competition Law, with detailed factual allegations tied to documented screenshots, consumer reviews, and the company’s own published terms. The claims include negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and violations of the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act. The complaint also documents a BBB F rating, 858 complaints, and user experiences spanning multiple years. The scale and consistency of documented harm across independent platforms, Trustpilot, the BBB, and WalletHub, gives the core allegations significant corroborating support.
Why was cancellation intentionally made so difficult?
▾
Because every additional month a user stays, whether they want to or not, is another month of revenue. The design of the cancellation flow, burying the cancel button under upsell offers, requiring a scheduled phone call, and deploying fear-based messaging about credit score damage, is the textbook playbook of dark pattern design. The FTC has specific guidance prohibiting exactly this kind of obstruction in subscription cancellation. TomoCredit’s system required users to schedule a call simply to exercise a legal right to cancel. That is not poor UX. It is deliberate friction engineered to benefit the company at the user’s expense.
What does the mandatory arbitration clause actually mean for consumers?
▾
It means TomoCredit designed its contracts to prevent any group of harmed customers from joining together to sue the company in court. Individual arbitration is expensive relative to the amount at stake for most users, which means most people will never pursue a claim. This is the legal equivalent of making the cost of accountability exceed the cost of the harm. It is a well-documented corporate strategy specifically designed to insulate companies from the consequences of widespread, low-dollar-per-victim misconduct. The class action complaint specifically challenges this provision as unconscionable and potentially unenforceable.
How does this connect to broader patterns of corporate misconduct in fintech?
▾
This case is a textbook example of what happens when a fintech company combines predatory subscription design with a regulatory environment that has been slow to enforce clear rules about negative option marketing. The FTC has published explicit principles requiring clear disclosure, affirmative consent, and easy cancellation for exactly these products. TomoCredit violated all five of the FTC’s core principles. The pattern, marketing to people in financial distress, delivering nothing, making exit nearly impossible, and hiding behind arbitration clauses, is not unique to TomoCredit. It is a structural feature of subscription-based fintech when accountability mechanisms fail.
What can I do if I was charged by TomoCredit and could not cancel?
▾
First, file a dispute with your bank or credit card issuer and document every cancellation attempt you made in writing. Second, file a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau at consumerfinance.gov/complaint and with your state attorney general’s consumer protection office. Third, file a complaint with the Better Business Bureau and on Trustpilot so other consumers can see documented patterns. Fourth, monitor this case. If a class is certified, affected consumers may be eligible to participate in any eventual settlement or judgment. The lawsuit seeks restitution of all fees paid under the automatic renewal program. Share this article. The people who were spared were the ones who read reviews first.
What can I do to prevent this from happening again?
▾
Before signing up for any credit-building service, search the company name plus the words “cancel,” “refund,” and “scam” on Trustpilot and the BBB. Check whether the company has an accessible phone number and a listed physical address. Demand to see the full terms of service before entering any payment information. Use a virtual credit card number, available free through many banks and through services like Privacy.com, so you can freeze the card number if a company refuses to stop charging you. Support legislation strengthening FTC enforcement authority over negative option marketing. Contact your elected representatives and tell them that the FTC’s 2023 proposed rule on subscription cancellation needs to be fully enacted and enforced. Corporate misconduct of this kind continues because it is cheaper than compliance. Make it expensive.
💡 Explore Corporate Misconduct by Category
Corporations harm people every day — from wage theft to pollution. Learn more by exploring key areas of injustice.
- 💀 Product Safety Violations — When companies risk lives for profit.
- 🌿 Environmental Violations — Pollution, ecological collapse, and unchecked greed.
- 💼 Labor Exploitation — Wage theft, worker abuse, and unsafe conditions.
- 🛡️ Data Breaches & Privacy Abuses — Misuse and mishandling of personal information.
- 💵 Financial Fraud & Corruption — Lies, scams, and executive impunity.
