Photo of Nikhil Singhvi

Nikhil Singhvi has more than 20 years of experience in all aspects of complex litigation and trial practice, government and internal investigations, and compliance counseling, and his practice covers complex advertising, consumer protection, and financial services matters. Specifically, he advises clients on UDAP, fintech, fair lending, auto finance, data privacy, lead generation, for-profit education, and related advertising and consumer protection enforcement and regulatory matters.

Nick joins the firm after serving as Assistant Director in the Division of Financial Practices in the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), where he coordinated FTC law enforcement and policy initiatives with federal and state partners and supervised investigations, litigations, and resolutions of consumer protection enforcement matters. In this role, Nick worked on groundbreaking cases and investigations, including two auto finance matters that resurrected the agency’s fair lending enforcement program, a small business financing matter that involved a novel invocation of the agency’s civil penalty authority, investigation of potentially discriminatory effects of algorithm-based advertising, and investigations, targeting, and education outreach in the fintech and cryptocurrency space. His matters covered a wide range of statutes and regulations, including the FTC Act, ECOA, TILA, CLA, FCRA, GLB Act, Telemarketing Sales Rule, Credit Practices Rule, Holder Rule, and state law.

Prior to his appointment as Assistant Director at the FTC, Nick served as a Staff Attorney, where he investigated and litigated consumer finance, advertising, debt collection, and lead generation matters. Notably, Nick was the lead attorney in the FTC’s enforcement action against payday lender AMG Services. In FTC v. AMG, he won three summary judgment opinions at different stages of the case, including a precedent-setting decision confirming the FTC’s jurisdiction over tribal businesses in a case of first impression and culminating in the FTC’s largest-ever consumer recovery ($505 million) in a litigated matter.

A recent class action filed in federal court against YouTube is the latest in a growing list of class actions against companies regarding their automatic renewal practices.

The suit alleges that YouTube and its parent company Google (together, “YouTube”) failed to provide the requisite disclosures and authorizations in connection with their subscription services, including YouTube TV, YouTube Music, and YouTube Premium, as required by Oregon’s Automatic Renewal Law (“ARL”) and in violation of Oregon’s Unlawful Trade Practices Act (“UTPA”).  See Walkingeagle, et al. v. Google LLC, et al., No. 3:22-cv-763 (D. Or.).  According to the complaint, YouTube enjoyed rapid growth in their user-base by employing “dark patterns” in their user interfaces to “trick” users into doing things they might not otherwise do, including signing up for recurring services (and bills).

Continue Reading YouTube Hit with Auto-Renewal Suit Over Its Online Subscriptions Services