In the Western District of Washington, Kymberly K. Evanson, denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Plaintiff denied submitting service requests through defendant’s site, creating an issue of fact.
Background. Lowell brought TCPA, CEMA, and CPA claims based on unwanted calls and texts. Angi argued that Lowell consented to binding arbitration when he submitted service requests through its platform. Lowell denied using Angi’s services, contending that Angi initiated the unwanted commercial text messages and phone calls.
The Court’s Analysis. Angi offered records associating service requests with Lowell’s information. Lowell submitted a declaration denying that he made those requests and evidence indicating that he was elsewhere when they allegedly occurred. The court found a genuine dispute over whether an agreement was formed and warranted discovery before deciding as a matter of law whether Lowell assented to Angi’s terms.
Significance. The ruling confirms that courts must resolve material disputes about online assent before enforcing arbitration provisions. A company’s internal records may not establish contract formation where the user presents contrary evidence.
Lowell v. Angi Inc., No. C25-1702-KKE, 2026 WL 1328221 (W.D. Wash. May 13, 2026).
