# FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

**October 14, 2026**

# Klarna Faces Broward County, Florida Lawsuit Over Disputed Groupon Transactions, Refund Representations, and Collection Activity

**Florida consumer alleges Klarna represented that a disputed payment had been refunded while continuing to seek payment and referring the balance to collections.**

**BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA —** Klarna, Inc., the buy-now-pay-later financial services company, is a defendant in a consumer lawsuit filed in Broward County, Florida, concerning disputed Groupon transactions, conflicting refund representations, and subsequent debt-collection activity.

The lawsuit, **Stephanie Martin v. Klarna, Inc., Case No. CONO26062406**, is pending in the County Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida.

According to Martin's allegations, she purchased Groupon vouchers through Klarna's installment-payment service on March 20, 2026, but did not receive the disputed services. Martin states that she made three installment payments and subsequently sought relief after the transactions were not satisfactorily resolved.

A central issue in the dispute concerns Klarna's representations regarding a purported refund.

In a June 19, 2026 chargeback response, Klarna represented that it had already refunded a disputed transaction to Martin's Klarna balance. In subsequent correspondence, Klarna representatives also referenced Groupon Bucks allegedly issued in connection with one of the transactions.

Martin disputes having received an accessible refund or usable credit resolving the outstanding dispute.

**Despite Klarna's representations concerning a refund, Martin alleges that the company continued seeking payment and referred a disputed balance to a collection agency.**

Martin maintains that these circumstances raise questions about the handling of consumer refunds, installment-payment accounting, chargeback disputes, and collection activity involving allegedly refunded transactions.

The lawsuit also seeks recovery of additional expenses Martin states she incurred while attempting to resolve the dispute, including certified-mail charges, transportation expenses, and UPS costs.

Martin has pursued an amendment to her statement of claim to address the disputed payment history and subsequent collection activity. The requested relief includes recovery of proven financial losses, legally recoverable expenses, and relief relating to the collection referral, subject to the court's determination.

"This case raises a straightforward question: If a company tells a consumer that a transaction has already been refunded, why is that consumer still being pursued for payment?" Martin said. "I believe consumers deserve accurate accounting, clear explanations, and fair treatment when they dispute charges."

The litigation remains pending. Martin's allegations have not been established by a final judicial determination, and Klarna is entitled to contest the claims and present its defenses.

**Court Information**

Case: Stephanie Martin v. Klarna, Inc.
Case Number: CONO26062406
Court: County Court, Seventeenth Judicial Circuit
Jurisdiction: Broward County, Florida

**Media Contact**

Stephanie Martin
Plaintiff, Self-Represented
Email: [email protected]