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.
Individual HTML example · Obstruction
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.
This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real company and is not a legal finding or safe harbour.
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.
Before you go. Five sequential retention steps stand between request and confirmation.. Blocking step: See another offer: current. Obscured outcome: End deliveries: current
Confirm cancellation. One optional alternative sits beside a direct confirmation action.. Completion step: End deliveries: completed. Recorded outcome: See another offer: completed. Request recorded: End deliveries
Why the first version can mislead: The route adds avoidable effort between the user’s stated intention and completion. In this meal-plan account example, the obstacle is: “Five sequential retention steps stand between request and confirmation.” Evidence should show whether the alternative remains usable and whether “End deliveries” reaches the represented state. Repeated friction can delay an intended exit and increase the chance of another billing cycle.
What a fairer design does: Keep optional save offers non-blocking and provide a stable direct path to confirmation.
Show annotated differences (2)
Potentially problematic version
- Obscured outcome: End deliveries: currentIn “Five save offers block the final exit”, this element shows how hard to cancel or opt out can shape the decision.
Neutral alternative
- Request recorded: End deliveriesIn “Five save offers block the final exit”, this element keeps the clearer alternative visible at the same decision point.
Review questions (3)
- How many steps, waits and channel changes separate “See another offer” from the completed meal-plan account outcome?
- Count steps, waits, offers and channel changes through final confirmation; where does the route meet “The route is difficult to find, non-straightforward or includes steps beyond those reasonably necessary”?
- Measure the same task through the clearest available route: does the effort difference persist once “mandatory consequence disclosure that does not impede completion” is accounted for?
Complete pattern context
How this example relates to Cancellation friction
Ending an existing subscription, recurring service or permission is made difficult to find or complete through unnecessary steps or channel asymmetry. 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
Account deletion 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.
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.
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
- Digital Services ActEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Regulation (EU) 2022/2065; CELEX 32022R2065
- Consumer Rights DirectiveEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Directive 2011/83/EU; CELEX 02011L0083-20220528
- Digital Fairness Act: call for evidence for an impact assessmentEuropean Commission · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Initiative 14622; Ares(2025)6275573