Can a website charge me for an extra service I didn't select?
The classic pre-ticked travel-insurance box isn't just annoying — under EU law, it's specifically illegal, and you can get the money back.
In the EU/UK, no — this is one of the most specific and clearly-worded consumer protections that exists, aimed directly at this exact practice. Article 22 of the EU Consumer Rights Directive (carried into UK law via the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013) requires a trader to get your express consent before charging any extra payment beyond the main price you agreed to. If they instead relied on a pre-ticked box that you had to actively un-tick to avoid the charge, that isn't valid consent — and you're legally entitled to get that specific payment back.
The law, word for word
"Before the consumer is bound by the contract or offer, the trader shall seek the express consent of the consumer to any extra payment in addition to the remuneration agreed upon for the trader's main contractual obligation. If the trader has not obtained the consumer's express consent but has inferred it by using default options which the consumer is required to reject in order to avoid the additional payment, the consumer shall be entitled to reimbursement of this payment." — Article 22, Directive 2011/83/EU
The classic example this was written for: booking a flight or event ticket online, where travel insurance, priority boarding, or a similar add-on is pre-selected by default, and you have to notice it and manually untick it to avoid paying for it. Under Article 22, if you missed it, the charge for that add-on isn't valid — full stop.
What counts as a violation vs. what's fine
| Situation | Valid consent? |
|---|---|
| An add-on checkbox is empty by default; you actively tick it to add it | Yes — this is exactly how it should work |
| An add-on checkbox is pre-ticked; you have to notice and untick it to avoid the charge | No — this is precisely what Article 22 prohibits, regardless of how clearly it was otherwise displayed |
| You're shown a clear yes/no choice with no default selected, and you pick "yes" | Yes — genuine active choice |
| An add-on is bundled into the total with no separate option to decline at all | No — this fails the consent requirement even more clearly than a pre-ticked box |
The US doesn't have a direct equivalent
There's no single federal law in the US that broadly bans pre-ticked add-on boxes across all retail the way Article 22 does. Similar issues are addressed piecemeal — subscription and "negative option" rules under ROSCA cover pre-checked boxes specifically in that context, and a growing number of states have their own dark-pattern-focused laws — but there's no general rule covering, say, a pre-ticked "expedited shipping" or "gift wrap" box on an ordinary product page the way EU/UK law does.
How to actually claim the reimbursement
- Identify the specific extra charge and confirm it was added via a pre-ticked or default-selected option, not something you actively chose.
- Contact the retailer directly, citing Article 22 of the Consumer Rights Directive (or, in the UK, the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013) and request reimbursement of that specific charge.
- Keep a screenshot or record of the checkout page if you have one — showing the option was pre-selected significantly strengthens your claim.
- If the retailer refuses or ignores the request, escalate to your national consumer protection authority or, in the UK, Trading Standards or the Citizens Advice consumer service.
Related questions
Official sources
Charged for an add-on you never chose?
Use Kibbo's Shopping & E-Commerce tools to draft a reimbursement request citing Article 22 directly.
Explore Shopping & E-Commerce tools →