Another Web Access Overlay Company Sued by a Small Business Class action lawsuit against UserWay alleges violations of Delaware Consumer Fraud Act and other laws

On This Page

This is an article about a lawsuit. The suit was filed by a small business against an overlay company named UserWay. (Overlays, sometimes called widgets, claim to make websites accessible with one line of code.)

The small business is named BloomsyBox. It sells and delivers flowers online. It paid for an overlay from UserWay because it believed UserWay’s claims that its overlay would make the flower company’s website accessible. It believed the overlay would protect it from lawsuits. Despite using the overlay, the flower company was sued by a blind person who could not use the BloomsyBox website. The lawsuit argues that UserWay violates the law because it misrepresents what an overlay does and for other reasons.

The most recent update to this article was posted On February 17, 2026. The update is about a court report recommending that key aspects of the case continue. UserWay had tried to get the case thrown out of court.

Article updated

This article has been updated since it was first published on February 16, 2025. The most recent update was added on February 17, 2026. Read the updates for this article.

a pile of triangular warning signs. The white triangle has a red border with a large black exclamation point in the center

Another class action lawsuit has been filed by a small business that purchased an overlay monthly subscription, yet still got hit with a lawsuit claiming its website was not accessible. This suit against UserWay by a small online florist, described below, is similar in scope to the class action lawsuit filed against AccessiBe, another overlay vendor, by a small skin care dermatology practice.

Jump to

share on linkedinshare on bluesky


So many reasons not to use a one-line-of-code overlay

I chose an image of a pile of warning signs to illustrate this short article because evidence continues to mount that one-line-of-code overlays do not make a website accessible to disabled people. They do not protect companies that license them from lawsuits under the Americans with Disabilities Act. These cases against UserWay and AccessiBe alone should serve as warnings to prospective buyers of the limitations of these products.

But the warnings don’t stop there.

The warnings are clear: if you want your online presence to work for everyone, and if you want to protect against web accessibility lawsuits, a one-line-of-code solution will not meet your needs.

The lawsuit against UserWay

Bloomsybox is an online flower delivery service that delivers flower bouquets to
cities throughout the United States and in five other countries. It operates only online through its website Bloomsybox.com.

In July of 2023 it bought a monthly subscription to User Way’s overlay product (also called a widget). Then, in December of that year, Bloomsybox was sued by a disabled person who could not use the flower delivery website despite the UserWay overlay.

The class action lawsuit, filed in the United States federal district court in Delaware, explains how Bloomsybox read and relied on promises and statements in UserWay’s advertising before licensing the product in 2023. Promises and statements that were not true.

Here is the 31 page Userway class action complaint. The case was filed last summer.


Here are other articles on this class action lawsuit against UserWay:

Updates to this article

February 17, 2026 Update

A year after the case against UserWay was filed, a Magistrate Judge has recommended that the key portions of it should move forward.  UserWay had tried to get the case thrown out of court. That effort (so far) has failed.

Magistrate judges (also called Magistrates) are appointed by district court judges to help with federal caseloads.  After UserWay filed a “motion to dismiss” asking the court to throw out the case discussed in this article, the motion was assigned to a Magistrate Judge. That Magistrate made a Report and Recommendations that a full judge in the case now has to approve.

Here are two options to read the full 19 page Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation:

The plaintiff in this case is a small florist who paid for the UserWay overlay but still got sued by a blind consumer claiming the site was not accessible. The Magistrate recommended that the florist be allowed to pursue its case and argue that UserWay’s advertising and product was in violation of the Delaware Consumer Fraud Act. 

The Magistrate also ruled that the small business could pursue its claim against UserWay for negligent misrepresentation.

It’s too early for the Magistrate or Judge to rule that  UserWay’s conduct actually violated the Delaware law, or that it negligently misrepresented information about its overlay. UserWay will still be able to argue that it did not. 

But the Magistrate’s Recommendation is an important first step for those of us who have long advocated against overlays because of the harms they cause disabled people and the inaccurate information used in marketing them.

What happens next? First, the full Judge in the case has to issue an order accepting the Report and Recommendations. This is likely to happen. (UserWay can try to convince the court not to accept it, which could  cause delay.)

Assuming the judge does approve the Report and Recommendations lawyers for the florist will begin discovery — reviewing documents, taking depositions, and asking for information.

I am so glad and grateful that the lawyers for the florist are pursuing this case on behalf of the small business and other customers against a company whose overlay is too common across the web.  But as I wrote in my Structured Negotiation book, discovery makes complaint resolution slow. We may not see action in this case for a while.

 

Back to the original article text