A fictional trial email provides an opt-out link that returns an error, then charges the customer because the failed request is recorded as no response.
Negative option or unauthorised transactionSubscription extensionCancellation
This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real business and is not a regulator finding, statutory category or legal safe harbour.
Subscription extensionCancellation
Broken opt-out still results in a charge
A fictional trial email provides an opt-out link that returns an error, then charges the customer because the failed request is recorded as no response.
Potentially problematicKeep your trial benefits
Keep your trial benefits. The opt-out link errors and the system interprets failure as acceptance.. Blocking step: upcoming. Obscured outcome: upcoming
The opt-out link errors and the system interprets failure as acceptance.
Blocking step
Obscured outcome
→
Neutral alternativeYour opt-out is recorded
Your opt-out is recorded. The request receives a timestamped receipt and no renewal charge is created.. Completion step: upcoming. Recorded outcome: upcoming. Request recorded: Download opt-out receipt
The request receives a timestamped receipt and no renewal charge is created.
Completion step
Recorded outcome
Request recorded: Download opt-out receipt
Why the first version can mislead: The final commercial state diverges from the choice represented earlier in the journey. The problematic state records: “The opt-out link errors and the system interprets failure as acceptance.” Review the timing and affirmative selection needed before “No response recorded” changes price, product or recurring liability. A person can be charged despite attempting to refuse the transaction through the supplied route.
What a fairer design does: Make the refusal route reliable, record attempted requests and suspend charging when the service cannot confirm the choice.
Show annotated differences (4)
Potentially problematic version
The opt-out link errors and the system interprets failure as acceptance.Why this state matters: The final commercial state diverges from the choice represented earlier in the journey. The problematic state records: “The opt-out link errors and the system interprets failure as acceptance.” Review the timing and affirmative selection needed before “No response recorded” changes price, product or recurring liability. A person can be charged despite attempting to refuse the transaction through the supplied route.
Obscured outcome: upcomingReview prompt: Which affirmative action authorises “No response recorded”, and where is the resulting price, product or recurring state shown before commitment?
Neutral alternative
The request receives a timestamped receipt and no renewal charge is created.Fairer design: Make the refusal route reliable, record attempted requests and suspend charging when the service cannot confirm the choice.
Request recorded: Download opt-out receiptReview prompt: Count steps, waits, offers and channel changes through final confirmation; where does the route meet “No clear current assent to that consequence is evidenced”?
Review questions (3)
Which affirmative action authorises “No response recorded”, and where is the resulting price, product or recurring state shown before commitment?
Count steps, waits, offers and channel changes through final confirmation; where does the route meet “No clear current assent to that consequence is evidenced”?
Which specific affirmative event creates the final commercial state, and could “transaction explicitly confirmed at the material decision point” explain the observed outcome instead?
Side-by-side subscription extension interface showing “Keep your trial benefits” and the clearer alternative “Your opt-out is recorded”.Provenance: Original hypothetical subscription extension example created for this library; no real business, product or interface is depicted.
Complete practice context
How this example relates to Negative option or unauthorised transaction
Silence, inactivity or an ineffective prior interaction is treated as authorisation for a paid or consequential transaction. This is a design and research taxonomy for learning and evidence review, not a statutory offence label or an automatic finding that an interface is unlawful.
The full guide explains inclusion and exclusion criteria, potential harms, fairer design, evidence questions and separate Australian legal information layers. The example page isolates one scenario so it can be shared and discussed without reproducing the complete library on one page.
A fictional booking flow records a basic fare selection but the final action purchases a premium flexible fare without a new price-and-product confirmation.