Account deletion obstruction
Deletion buried behind an unsupported ticket
A fictional retailer places account deletion behind six help pages and requires a support ticket containing an order number even for users who never ordered.
Individual HTML example · Obstruction
Deactivation presented as deletion
A fictional platform labels a control “Delete account”, but the confirmation only hides the profile and leaves data and reactivation available indefinitely.
This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real company and is not a legal finding or safe harbour.
Deactivation presented as deletion
A fictional platform labels a control “Delete account”, but the confirmation only hides the profile and leaves data and reactivation available indefinitely.
Delete account. The resulting state is only temporary deactivation, disclosed after the action.. Delete now. Unconfirmed state: Delete now
Choose deactivation or deletion. Each option states what remains, for how long and whether recovery is possible.. Permanently delete account. Saved state: Permanently delete account. Persisted account state, expanded: The saved state behind “Permanently delete account” remains consistent after refresh and across supported channels.
Why the first version can mislead: The route adds avoidable effort between the user’s stated intention and completion. In this social account settings example, the obstacle is: “The resulting state is only temporary deactivation, disclosed after the action.” Evidence should show whether the alternative remains usable and whether “Permanently delete account” reaches the represented state. A person may reasonably believe the account and associated data were deleted when only visibility changed.
What a fairer design does: Separate deactivation from deletion and state retention, timing, recovery and consequences before confirmation.
Show annotated differences (2)
Potentially problematic version
- Unconfirmed state: Delete nowIn “Deactivation presented as deletion”, this element shows how account deletion obstruction can shape the decision.
Neutral alternative
- Persisted account state, expanded: The saved state behind “Permanently delete account” remains consistent after refresh and across supported channels.In “Deactivation presented as deletion”, this element keeps the clearer alternative visible at the same decision point.
Review questions (3)
- How many steps, waits and channel changes separate “Delete now” from the completed social account settings outcome?
- Test the control across refresh, device and account states; is “The user seeks permanent account deletion” still observable after persistence is considered?
- Measure the same task through the clearest available route: does the effort difference persist once “Legally required record retention clearly distinguished from account access” is accounted for?
Complete pattern context
How this example relates to Account deletion obstruction
Deleting an account is unavailable, disguised as another outcome or burdened by unnecessary barriers. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
The full guide explains inclusion and exclusion criteria, harms, fair design principles, evidence questions and the relevant EU legal information layers. The example page isolates one scenario so it can be shared and discussed without reproducing the complete library on one page.
Continue comparing
Related examples
Open this example
Cancellation friction
Online signup requires telephone cancellation
A fictional streaming service accepts signup in three online steps but requires a weekday telephone call, repeated identity questions and a retention interview to cancel.
Cancellation friction
Five save offers block the final exit
A fictional account shows a new discount, pause offer or survey after every click on “Cancel”, and the final confirmation appears only after five refusals.
Sources and provenance for this example
Evidence base
Sources
- Dark commercial patternsOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · Secondary · checked 2026-09-14 · OECD Digital Economy Papers No. 336
- Unfair Commercial Practices DirectiveEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Directive 2005/29/EC; CELEX 02005L0029-20220528