Suit against Kardashians over credit card struck down

A California judge has thrown out a lawsuit filed against the Kardashian sisters after they pulled their endorsement of a prepaid debit card that drew criticism for its high fees, according to the Associated Press.

A Fresno Superior Court judge ruled last week that sisters Kim, Khloe and Kourtney Kardashian should not be responsible for damages that resulted in their pulling out of a deal to endorse the card, which was criticized by the Connecticut attorney general’s office in November.

The Kardashian Kard had a terrible pricing model. A prepaid card, most likely targeted at starstruck kids–it costs between $60 and $100 to activate—an unprecedented starter fee for prepaid cards.

Fresno-based Revenue Resource Group LLC sued the reality show starlets in January, claiming the sisters’ negative public comments about the card cost them $75 million. But the card was ripe for criticism.

Here’s the full list of the card’s abnormally high fees:

Card Purchase (Includes monthly fees for 6 months) $59.95
Card Purchase (Includes monthly fees for 12 months) $99.95
Monthly Fee (Applies after initial purchase period) $7.95
Card Replacement – Primary or Companion $9.95
ATM Withdrawal – Domestic $1.50
ATM Inquiry or Decline – Domestic $1.00
ATM Withdrawal – International $2.50
ATM Inquiry or Decline – International $2.00
Point of Sale – Decline -Domestic $1.00
Point of Sale – Decline – International $1.00
External Checking or Savings Transfer (To/From) $1.00
Account to Account Transfer * $1.00
Retail Load Fee (MoneyGram) $1.00
Load Account by Debit/Credit Card ** $1.00
Cancel Account – Request Balance Mailed by Check $6.00
Service Center Care-Live operator $1.50
Bill Pay – Per Item $2.00
Replacement Card Expedite Fee (Overnight) $25.00

* Fee for transferring money from external accounts and to other cardholder accounts
** 2.5% surcharge of transaction amount applies

Attorneys for the sisters’ company, Dash Dolls LLC and their mother, Kris Kardashian, argued the case should be dismissed because it violated their free speech rights. Court records show a judge agreed and issued a ruling dismissing the case on June 7.