UserWay's "$1 Million Pledge" Didn't Stop the Lawsuit: The BloomsyBox Case and 187 Others

In 2024, 187 ADA website accessibility lawsuits were filed against websites running UserWay's overlay widget. In the same year, one of UserWay's own customers — an online flower delivery company — sued UserWay itself in a class action, alleging the company's marketing was deceptive and its "$1 million pledge" of legal support was illusory.

This article examines the data, the BloomsyBox class action, and what UserWay's track record means for businesses relying on overlay widgets for ADA compliance.

The Numbers

According to EcomBack's 2024 annual report, 722 ADA lawsuits in 2024 were filed against websites with accessibility widgets installed. Of those:

On CourtListener, we searched for "userway" across 2025 federal filings and found 16 documents directly referencing UserWay in case materials. These included cases in S.D. Florida, W.D. Pennsylvania, M.D. Florida, and S.D. Indiana. Plaintiffs included serial filers like Victor Ariza, Nelson Fernandez, and Enrique Alvear — names that appear repeatedly in ADA accessibility litigation.

In January 2025 alone, UsableNet reported that 85 defendants were sued while using a third-party accessibility widget, including overlays like UserWay.

The BloomsyBox Class Action: Full Timeline

The most significant legal development involving UserWay isn't an ADA lawsuit against a UserWay customer. It's a class action lawsuit by a UserWay customer against UserWay for failing to deliver on its promises.

The Parties

Plaintiff: BloomsyBox.com LLC, a Miami-based online flower delivery service operating in 15 U.S. cities and five countries.

Defendant: UserWay, Inc., headquartered in Delaware.

Court: United States District Court for the District of Delaware.

Filed: July 2024.

What Happened

July 2023: BloomsyBox was updating its website and researched accessibility providers. UserWay marketed its overlay as a "one-stop solution" that would ensure ADA compliance, prevent lawsuits, and provide up to $1 million in legal support if litigation occurred. BloomsyBox purchased a monthly subscription.

December 2023: Six months after installing UserWay's overlay, BloomsyBox was served with an ADA lawsuit. A blind customer had attempted to use the website and found it still inaccessible despite the overlay.

After the lawsuit was filed: BloomsyBox contacted UserWay seeking the promised legal support. UserWay told them their monthly subscription didn't qualify — they needed to upgrade to an annual plan. BloomsyBox upgraded.

After upgrading: UserWay's legal support consisted of a generic "Legal Action Guide" that BloomsyBox described as unhelpful. UserWay then closed the support ticket, leaving BloomsyBox to handle the lawsuit independently.

Final result: BloomsyBox spent $4,000 in external attorney fees and settled the ADA case with a monetary payment — entirely out of pocket.

July 2024: BloomsyBox filed a class action against UserWay.

The Legal Claims

BloomsyBox is pursuing UserWay on four legal grounds:

1. Breach of Contract — UserWay failed to deliver the ADA compliance and legal support it contractually promised.
2. Violation of the Delaware Consumer Fraud Act — UserWay's marketing contained false and misleading representations.
3. Violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act — UserWay's warranty claims about compliance were unsubstantiated.
4. Negligent Misrepresentation — UserWay made statements about compliance capabilities it knew or should have known were false.

The "$1 Million Pledge"

The complaint specifically targets UserWay's marketing of its "$1,000,000 pledge" for legal support. BloomsyBox alleges this pledge was structured with conditions that made it nearly impossible to collect:

• The pledge required a case to be litigated to judgment — a rare outcome in web accessibility cases, which almost always settle.
• The practical effect: UserWay could market million-dollar protection while knowing the conditions would virtually never be triggered.

As the complaint states, UserWay's assurances were designed to "induce businesses to purchase its widget as an effective alternative to the work required to actually be ADA compliant."

Court Proceedings (2025)

UserWay moved to dismiss the case and simultaneously moved to halt discovery — meaning they wouldn't have to produce documents or answer interrogatories.

Judge Sherry Fallon denied UserWay's motion to halt discovery. The court analyzed the relevant factors and ruled that the case should proceed, requiring UserWay to participate in the discovery process. This means BloomsyBox can compel UserWay to produce internal documents, emails, marketing materials, and data about overlay effectiveness.

The case remains active.

(Source: Law Office of Lainey Feingold, Title2.Info)

UserWay's Marketing Claims vs. Reality

The website OverlayFalseClaims.com has documented UserWay's specific marketing claims with screenshots:

UserWay later edited some of these claims on its website — but the BloomsyBox complaint captures the original marketing language.

Why Overlays Like UserWay Fail

The technical limitations are identical to those that plague all overlay products:

They don't modify source code. An overlay sits on top of a website as a JavaScript layer. It cannot restructure HTML heading hierarchies, fix broken ARIA roles, or repair inaccessible custom widgets built into the site's codebase.

They interfere with assistive technology. Overlays can conflict with screen readers, creating new barriers. Blind users have reported that overlay-equipped sites become harder to navigate, not easier.

They can't fix content problems. Missing alt text on images, unlabeled form fields, inaccessible PDFs, broken link text — these are content issues that require human intervention, not automated JavaScript injection.

They create a "separate but equal" experience. Rather than making the actual website accessible, overlays attempt to create an alternative interface layer. The accessibility community has compared this to the discredited "separate but equal" doctrine.

The Broader Pattern

Both major overlay vendors are now facing legal accountability:

The European Disability Forum and the International Association of Accessibility Professionals issued a joint statement in 2023: "Overlays do not make the website accessible or compliant with European accessibility legislation."

Over 600 accessibility professionals have signed the Overlay Fact Sheet opposing overlay products.

For the FTC's case against the other major overlay vendor, see AccessiBe's $1M fine and 456 lawsuits.

What Happened After BloomsyBox

BloomsyBox's experience is not unique. The pattern repeats across industries:

1. Business installs overlay, believing it solves accessibility
2. Plaintiff attempts to use website with assistive technology, encounters barriers
3. Plaintiff files lawsuit
4. Business contacts overlay vendor for promised legal support
5. Legal support is inadequate or unavailable
6. Business settles out of pocket

The overlay vendor collects subscription revenue throughout. If the business gets sued, the vendor faces no liability (unless the business sues the vendor, as BloomsyBox did).

What To Do If You Currently Use UserWay

1. Do not rely on the overlay for compliance. The data is clear: it doesn't prevent lawsuits.
2. Commission an independent accessibility audit against WCAG 2.1 AA. You can start with a free Woffy scan to see what automated testing reveals.
3. Fix issues in your source code. HTML remediation, ARIA implementation, keyboard navigation, alt text — these need to happen at the code level, not in an overlay layer. Solutions like Woffy modify your actual WordPress or Shopify code — the opposite of what UserWay does.
4. Test with screen readers. JAWS, NVDA, and VoiceOver should all be able to navigate your key user flows.
5. Consider whether the overlay is making things worse. If blind users are experiencing interference from the widget, removing it may improve the actual user experience while you remediate.
6. Review your vendor contract. Understand what legal protections you actually have (and don't have) under your agreement.

The choice isn't between cheap overlays that don't work and expensive manual audits. Non-overlay ADA compliance tools like Woffy provide real code fixes at a fraction of the cost of traditional remediation.

Sources: EcomBack 2024 Annual Report, Law Office of Lainey Feingold, Title2.Info, Design Domination, OverlayFalseClaims.com, UsableNet Midyear Report, CourtListener RECAP Archive, Overlay Fact Sheet