FASHION FAUX PAS: Alice + Olivia Hit With Class Action TCPA Lawsuit Alleging They Did Not Honor “No More Messages” Requests For Months

Hi TCPAWorld. The Dame here.

So if you have ever met Queenie, you know Alice + Olivia (A+O) is basically her uniform. She rocks it daily. See below for reference:

Unfortunately for her favorite brand, they just got hit with a new TCPA class action.

On January 20, 2026, Plaintiff Natali Chernova filed a class action complaint in the Southern District of Florida alleging A+O simply refuses to take “no” for an answer. Chernova v. Alice + Olivia, LLC, No. 1:26-cv-20356-CMA (S.D. Fla. filed Jan. 20, 2026).

While Queenie keeps buying, Chernova apparently wanted out. And it allegedly didn’t go well.

According to the Complaint, Chernova started getting texts from A+O’s short code (54098) in April 2025. She allegedly tried to opt out on April 22, 2025, by replying with the phrase “No more messages.”

The A+O’s system texted back a standard “Thanks for texting us!” autoreply but seemingly failed to actually stop sending messages according to the Complaint.

Just two days later, on April 24, A+O allegedly slid back into her DMs with: “you’re officially on the list early access to the vacation drop starts now!”

And allegedly again on April 25, with: “24 hours left your early access to the vacation drop ends tonight!”

On April 25, Chernova hit A+O with a second “No more messages”.

The Complaint alleges that despite this a “persistent and incessant barrage” of texts followed throughout May and June, promoting everything from “the thong drop” to a “Happy Pride” sale.

You can see the breakup attempts in the screenshots below:

Plaintiff alleges the messages didn’t stop until June 10, 2025—almost two months after she asked them to stop.

The lawsuit alleges violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227(c), claiming A+O failed to maintain a written policy for their internal DNC list or train their personnel on how to use it.

Under 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(d), companies are mandated to maintain a written policy for maintaining an internal DNC list and train their personnel on how to use it. Additionally, when a consumer makes a DNC request, the company must honor it within a reasonable time, which the law now states may not exceed ten (10) business days from the receipt of such request.

Now, Plaintiff seeks to represent a National Internal Do Not Call Class defined as:

“From four years before the filing of the Complaint, all persons in the United States who (1) were sent more than one text message by or on behalf of Defendant within any 12-month period; (2) regarding Defendant’s goods or services, to said person’s cellular telephone number; and (3) while Defendant did not maintain the required procedures under 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(d) for maintaining a list of persons who request not to receive such calls.”

We will keep an eye on this one. You can read the full lawsuit here: Chernova v Alice + Olivia

And yes, Queenie is probably still shopping the sale.

Oh also, LCOC tickets are now on sale! Here is the link: Law Conference of Champions – Presented by Troutman Amin, LLP

 


Discover more from TCPAWorld

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Categories:

Leave a Reply