Blog

Direct Fairways LLC is a golf course advertising company based in Arizona. The company sells ad placements to small businesses. The ads appear on golf scorecards, yardage books, and course signage.  Lawsuits allege that the company used misleading sales tactics. Clients say the company overpromised exposure at golf courses and failed to deliver the ads as sold. Many small businesses also report unauthorized or repeated billing on their credit cards.

Several legal tracks have now developed. One track focuses on false advertising and breach of contract between Direct Fairways and small businesses. Another track involves a federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) case over alleged unsolicited telemarketing calls.  There is no single national settlement. There is no federal MDL that groups every Direct Fairways claim into one court. As of November 30, 2025, the litigation posture remains fragmented across state and federal courts.

Latest Updates (Pinned)

Lawyers who follow this litigation focus on three main developments.

• 2022 breach of contract case filed by Amur Equipment Finance Inc. against Direct Fairways in a state court over commercial obligations

• 2022 reported class action was filed on behalf of golf courses and small businesses that accuse Direct Fairways of deceptive advertising and unauthorized billing

• October 2024 filing of Lucombe v. Direct Fairways LLC, case number 8:24-cv-02531, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, alleging TCPA violations based on unsolicited calls.

• Hundreds of consumer and small-business complaints were logged with the Better Business Bureau, with one source reporting more than 290 complaints in total and over 80 in a recent 12-month span.

• Reports of an NLRB case involving Direct Fairways in 2023 over labor issues, which shows a broader pattern of legal scrutiny around the company’s practices, although that case does not deal with customer advertising claims.

• Media and law-blog coverage in 2025 that continues to describe ongoing private lawsuits, putative class actions, and unresolved disputes, with no publicly reported global settlement as of now.

Filings show active litigation on several fronts. Courts have not yet issued a final merits ruling that resolves the main advertising and billing allegations across the board.

Why Plaintiffs Are Filing Lawsuits

Plaintiffs in the Direct Fairways lawsuits fall into two main groups.

First group. Small businesses that purchased advertising. These owners include real estate agents, contractors, restaurants, and other local service providers. They say they paid hundreds or thousands of dollars for golf course advertising that either never appeared or appeared in a much smaller way than promised.

Second group. Individuals and business contacts who received marketing calls. Lawsuits allege that sales teams at Direct Fairways or its agents placed unsolicited calls and used automated systems without proper consent.

The core allegations follow a standard burden-of-proof path:

• Misrepresentation. Plaintiffs say sales representatives claimed specific partnerships with named golf courses and guaranteed exposure to many golfers. They later found that courses had no record of the relationship or that the distribution volumes were far lower than promised.

• Unauthorized billing. Many complaints describe repeated or renewed charges after a one-time fee agreement. Business owners say they did not authorize those extra charges.

• Non-delivery and breach of contract. Lawsuits allege that the company failed to provide the advertising placements that the contracts described. When clients asked for refunds, they reported delay, denial, or silence.

• Telemarketing violations. TCPA filings claim unlawful automated calls and calls to numbers on do-not-call lists. Filings show that plaintiffs in Lucombe v. Direct Fairways seek statutory damages under the TCPA.

Injury in these cases is mostly financial. Business owners say they lost advertising money and time. Some also argue that the false association with local golf facilities caused reputational harm in their communities.

Evidence and Scientific Support

Direct Fairways litigation does not center on medical science. It centers on documentation. Evidence in these cases usually falls into four buckets.

Contracts and sales scripts

Lawsuits allege that standard form contracts and phone scripts contain exaggerated claims about reach, impressions, and golf course relationships. Plaintiffs rely on the written language in those documents to show false or misleading statements.

Billing records and bank statements

Credit card records show recurring or unexpected charges for advertising. Complaints point to these records to support claims of unauthorized billing and unfair renewal practices.

Golf course confirmations and incident reports

Many business owners contact golf courses directly. They report that courses either have no contract with Direct Fairways or know nothing about the specific ad that was sold. Those confirmations support the false advertising and breach-of-contract theories.

Regulatory and complaint data

The Better Business Bureau database and state Attorney General complaint files show patterns. Owners repeat similar stories about high-pressure calls, non-delivery, and refund disputes. Lawsuits cite those patterns to show that the alleged practices are not isolated mistakes.

There is no FDA role in this litigation. There is no need for peer-reviewed medical studies. Instead, courts focus on consumer-protection statutes, telemarketing law, and contract law. Legal analysis compares these facts to general false-advertising and TCPA frameworks under state and federal law.

MDL Status and Court Activity

Direct Fairways cases do not sit inside a federal MDL at this stage. There is no JPML order that centralizes all lawsuits in one district court.

The current posture looks like this:

• Federal TCPA action. Lucombe v. Direct Fairways LLC, 8:24-cv-02531, pending in the Middle District of Florida. Filings show TCPA claims over alleged unsolicited telemarketing calls. The case seeks statutory damages and injunctive relief. Discovery and motion practice remain early. No trial date appears in public summaries yet.

• State breach-of-contract case. Amur Equipment Finance Inc. v. Direct Fairways LLC, filed September 16, 2022, as a commercial contract case. That case addresses alleged non-payment or performance failures on financing or equipment obligations, not small-business advertising claims.

• Reported class action for small businesses. Secondary sources describe a class action filed in 2022 by golf courses and small businesses over deceptive marketing and billing. Public court dockets for that class action remain harder to trace. Many law-blog summaries treat the suit as active but do not list a federal MDL number. elebrity News – Surveys Hyatt+2Celebrity News – Surveys Hyatt+2

• Labor law proceedings. NLRB materials show a case caption that includes Direct Fairways LLC in 2023. That matter concerns workplace and union issues. It does not change the consumer-protection analysis but confirms broader legal exposure around the company.

Courts ruled in many TCPA and false advertising cases against other companies that broad classes can recover meaningful damages when patterns of conduct repeat across customers. That history shapes settlement strategy in Direct Fairways cases, even though there is no MDL here.

Expected Settlement Amounts

No court has approved a public class settlement against Direct Fairways as of November 30, 2025. That matters. Any settlement discussion here stays predictive and general. A lawyer would walk clients through ranges, not guarantees. To frame settlement value, litigators look at three things.

TCPA exposure

Under the TCPA, courts may award $500 per violating call or text, or up to $1,500 for willful violations.  Class action settlements in TCPA cases often fall between $5 million and $60 million in total, with an average of around $6.6 million in some study periods.

Those figures involve national consumer classes, very large call volumes, and big corporate defendants. Direct Fairways operates in a smaller niche. A TCPA class here would likely involve lower call counts and a narrower class. So a realistic TCPA settlement range against a mid-size marketing company would likely sit well below the headline numbers seen in cases against national banks and telecoms.

False advertising and small-business class claims

In false advertising and unfair-trade class actions, courts approved settlements in the mid-single-digit millions for B2B and restaurant groups. A recent example is a $7.1 million settlement for restaurants in a false-listing class action against Grubhub.  Direct Fairways cases involve alleged misrepresentation of ad reach and unauthorized billing. That puts them closer to classic false-advertising and unfair-trade patterns than to catastrophic personal injury. Settlement values in those cases often track actual payments made plus an additional amount for statutory damages and fees.

Individual contract and refund cases

Many Direct Fairways disputes remain one-off refund fights. The typical claim size runs from a few hundred dollars to several thousand dollars per business.  For those cases, settlements or judgments often mirror the contract amount, sometimes with extra interest or fee shifting. Those values rarely reach published news. A cautious mass-tort litigator would tell a small-business client two things.

You might see recovery equal to some or all of what you paid if liability is proven. You should not expect life-changing money in a case that involves advertising fees and statutory telemarketing damages. Outcomes depend on class certification, proof of consent, volume of contacts, and the financial capacity of Direct Fairways itself.

Lawsuit Timeline

The Direct Fairways litigation track has developed over several years.

• Pre-2020. Direct Fairways builds a business model that sells golf course advertising to small businesses.

• 2018–2021. Complaints start to appear on review sites and social media. Owners describe cold calls, high-pressure pitches, and poor delivery of ad placements.

• 2020–2022. BBB complaints rise. Some business owners report that they contacted state Attorneys General to seek relief when refunds did not arrive.

• September 2022. Amur Equipment Finance Inc. files a commercial breach-of-contract case against Direct Fairways LLC. That case shows that larger financing partners also have disputes with the company.

• 2022. Secondary sources report a class action filed by golf courses and small businesses over deceptive advertising and billing practices. The case aims to consolidate many similar claims.

• April 2023. NLRB materials list Direct Fairways LLC in an administrative case, adding labor-law issues to the legal picture.

• October 2024. Lucombe v. Direct Fairways LLC is filed in the Middle District of Florida. The complaint alleges TCPA violations for unsolicited telemarketing calls that used improper dialing systems.

• 2024–2025. Online law blogs publish multiple explainers on the Direct Fairways lawsuit. They describe ongoing cases, no global settlement, and continued intake of business-owner complaints.

Courts have not yet ruled on a master settlement structure. There is no final judgment that closes out the main consumer-facing allegations.

Who Qualifies for the Lawsuit

Eligibility depends on the legal track and on case definitions. A lawyer screens clients along several key points.

For small-business advertising and billing claims

You may fit the typical fact pattern if:

• You are a business or professional who signed an advertising contract with Direct Fairways.

• You paid for golf course advertising or directory placements.

• You never saw the ad placed, or the exposure looked far below what salespeople promised.

• You saw charges on your card or account that you did not approve, such as renewals or extra fees.

• You asked for a refund or cancellation and did not receive a fair resolution.

For TCPA telemarketing claims

You may qualify for telemarketing relief under a class definition if:

• Direct Fairways or a related entity calls your mobile or landline number for sales purposes.

• You did not give clear written consent to those calls.

• Your number sat on the National Do Not Call Registry during the calls.

• Calls used prerecorded messages or automated dialing systems.

Each lawsuit sets its own class definition. Courts decide who fits inside that class. A lawyer will match your records to the exact language in the complaint and any class-certification order.

How to File a Claim

A business owner or individual who wants to pursue a claim usually follows a simple legal path.

1. Gather documents
   Contracts, invoices, emails, texts, credit-card statements, chargeback records, and screenshots of any ads that did appear. Precise records help lawyers test your claim against the legal theories in play.

2. Check your call and email history
   Save phone logs that show incoming numbers tied to Direct Fairways. Keep recordings or voicemails if you have them. For TCPA cases, call count and consent evidence matter a lot.

3. Confirm current case posture
   Your lawyer checks whether there is an active class action that covers your situation. You might join a putative class or file your own individual action depending on timing and claim size.

4. Speak with a lawyer who handles consumer or TCPA cases
   That lawyer can explain which statute applies. That analysis may include state consumer-protection laws, general contract law, and the TCPA.

5. Follow formal claim-filing steps
   If a court later approves a settlement, a claims administrator usually handles claim forms. You would submit a form, attach proof, and wait for the administrator to calculate any distribution. Until then, you preserve your documents and stay in touch with your lawyer.

No one can guarantee a recovery. Courts ruled in many consumer cases that proof of loss, proof of misrepresentation, and proof of causation must line up before damages flow.

FAQs

Who is the owner of Direct Fairways?

Business filings list Joshua Pope as the primary executive associated with Direct Fairways. Records from Arizona and other state databases link him to leadership roles in the company. Direct Fairways has also operated under related trade names, including Golf Marketing Company, according to public filings and complaints.

How much do you get paid at Direct Fairways?

Pay at Direct Fairways varies by job type and commission structure. Sales representatives often work on performance-based commissions. Administrative and support roles report standard hourly wages in public job listings. Employee pay information comes from job boards, review sites, and NLRB-related records.

Is Direct Fairways a good job?

Employee feedback on Direct Fairways is mixed. Some workers report strong commission potential in sales roles. Others mention high turnover and sales-pressure expectations. Public reviews and labor filings provide most of the available insight into workplace conditions.

Who is Direct Fairways?

Direct Fairways is a golf marketing company based in Arizona. The business sells advertising on golf course scorecards, yardage books, and related promotional materials. Lawsuits filed against the company cite false advertising, unauthorized billing, and telemarketing violations.
The company has also appeared under the name Golf Marketing Company in some complaints and business records.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information, not legal advice. If you have any questions about this, please don’t hesitate to contact us.