Direct Fairways LLC sells print advertising on golf course scorecards, yardage books, and related materials. The company operates from Tempe, Arizona, and holds itself out as a marketing option for local businesses near golf courses.

You need clear facts before you judge any “Direct Fairways lawsuit” headlines. Court records show one recent federal case over telemarketing and at least one commercial contract dispute. Public complaint data also shows a long pattern of billing and advertising grievances, yet no court has issued a broad fraud ruling against the company.

It is important to know that consumer complaints and lawsuits sit in different lanes. Complaints on the Better Business Bureau site describe recurring problems. The lawsuits focus on specific legal theories, including the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and commercial contract law.

How The Lawsuit Conversation Started

You see growing online focus on a direct fairways tcpa lawsuit because of a single federal case. In October 2024, a plaintiff named Nigel Lucombe filed Lucombe v Direct Fairways LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The case carried number 8:24-cv-02531 and listed the nature of the suit as a Telephone Consumer Protection Act claim.

The complaint invoked the TCPA and sought relief over alleged unsolicited telemarketing calls. The Law360 case summary also tagged the case as multi-party litigation with a class action label. That label signals a putative class claim, not a certified class.

Background Of The Direct Fairways Case

Direct Fairways LLC appears on the BBB rolls as a directory advertising business. The profile lists the company as “NOT BBB Accredited” and notes that BBB is evaluating a pattern of complaints before assigning a rating. The file states that the local BBB opened the record in 2015 and that the business started operations earlier in the 2010s.

You should look at the complaint statistics to understand the volume. BBB data shows 278 total complaints in the last three years and 77 complaints closed in the last twelve months as of late 2025. Many fall under service issues, product issues, billing issues, and sales and advertising issues.

Those figures feed the phrase direct fairways bbb complaints. Complaints describe repeated themes. Customers say they agreed to a single payment and later saw extra charges. Customers say they expected one-year deals and later heard about two-year terms or higher totals. Some question whether ads ever ran at the promised golf course.

Court filings sit on top of that landscape. The Lucombe v Direct Fairways case stands out because it pulls the company into federal TCPA territory. In that case, the plaintiff relied on 47 U.S.C. § 227, the statute that limits certain types of sales calls and dialing practices.

A separate record concerns an Amur Equipment Finance Direct Fairways dispute. A Trellis summary states that Amur Equipment Finance Inc. filed a breach-of-contract commercial case against Direct Fairways LLC and related defendants on September 16, 2022. The summary lists the matter as a commercial contract action, not a consumer class action.

Key Allegations

You should separate the two buckets of allegations. One bucket comes from consumers and small businesses in public complaints. The second bucket comes from formal court pleadings.

BBB complaints form the clearest record of direct fairways advertising complaints. Many complainants say sales staff promised a single fee for placement on local golf course materials. Some complainants say they later found multiple card charges or higher totals than expected. Others say they never saw their ad in print or never saw measurable business from the campaign.

Complaint narratives often frame the issue as direct, fairways unauthorized charges. One complainant says the business agreed to a twelve-month ad for about three hundred dollars, then later attempted a charge near four hundred dollars that the customer viewed as a new fee. Another complainant lists several card charges over several months and claims more than one thousand dollars beyond the amount they recall approving.

Company responses on the BBB site tell a different story. Direct Fairways states that ads are printed and shipped within a 180-day production window. The company cites “premium placement” upgrades in some files. The business often says it reached a “mutual understanding” with the sponsor and marks the matter as resolved from its perspective.

In the Lucombe v Direct Fairways case, the complaint alleged unlawful telemarketing under the TCPA. The PACERMonitor summary lists the cause of action as “47:227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment” and classifies the nature of suit as “Other Statutes – Telephone Consumer Protection Act.”

No public federal record states that a judge found Direct Fairways liable for fraud, deceptive practices, or TCPA violations in that matter. The docket shows a voluntary dismissal instead.

Timeline Of The Direct Fairways Case

1. Early Complaints And Consumer Reports

BBB opened its file on Direct Fairways in September 2015. The profile lists the firm as a golf-related advertising provider and notes payment by major cards and other methods.

Complaint volumes rose over time. The current BBB complaints page reports 278 total complaints over the last three years, and 77 closed in the last twelve months. Many entries from 2024 and 2025 describe disputes over repeat charges, contract terms, and whether ads ran as promised.

You should view those numbers as a signal of risk, not as a court judgment. BBB itself warns that it does not verify every detail of complaint narratives and that it focuses on how businesses respond.

2. Company Response Or Public Reaction

Direct Fairways uses the BBB platform to answer many complaints. The company often says ads printed and went to press as scheduled. Responses cite shipment dates and tracking numbers. In some cases, the company says it waived fees or cancelled accounts while leaving ads in place at the course.

Customers sometimes accept those responses and mark the complaint resolved. Others disagree and describe the outcome as unsatisfactory. The BBB status fields show a mix of “Resolved” and “Answered” results.

3. Legal Filings And Court Actions

The first widely noted lawsuit in public summaries is the Amur Equipment Finance commercial action. Trellis reports that Amur filed suit on September 16, 2022, over a business financing contract. The case falls in the “Breach of Contract – Commercial” category. Public summaries do not describe a consumer class or a fraud ruling.

An NLRB advice memoranda listing shows an entry labeled “Direct Fairways, LLC, National Labor Relations Board, 28-CA-303838.” The vital law summary notes a case-closing email on April 17, 2023. The snippet confirms that a labor matter reached the agency but does not describe the underlying allegations.

The direct fairways telemarketing calls dispute appears later. On October 29, 2024, plaintiff Nigel Lucombe filed a complaint against Direct Fairways LLC in the Middle District of Florida. The docket assigns number 8:24-cv-02531 and lists Senior Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell as the presiding judge. The case falls under TCPA law and carries a class-action tag in Law360 summaries.

Service occurred in November 2024, and the court later issued an order requiring the plaintiff to show cause regarding timely service. After service, the plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal on April 4, 2025. On April 9, 2025, the court entered an order dismissing the case without prejudice and closed the file.

You should note that the court never issued a detailed opinion on liability, class certification, or damages in Lucombe. The docket closes on a procedural step initiated by the plaintiff.

4. Judge Notes Or Judicial Comments

Public summaries for the Amur Equipment Finance case and for Lucombe do not show any extended written opinions on Direct Fairways’ conduct. The PACERMonitor extract for Lucombe lists procedural orders but no merits ruling.

That means you do not have judicial findings that confirm or reject the broader billing and marketing allegations that appear in complaints. The lawsuits show exposure and risk, not a final legal label.

5. Regulatory Or Government Actions

The vital law reference to an NLRB advice memoranda confirms that Direct Fairways had at least one labor matter before the National Labor Relations Board. The note states that the agency sent a case-closing email in April 2023.

Searches of public federal and state sites do not reveal any FTC enforcement action, state attorney-general consumer complaint lawsuit, or formal government fraud case against Direct Fairways as of December 2025. That absence does not clear the company. It only shows that any such action either does not exist or has not appeared in public summaries yet.

6. Settlement Timeline

You do not see a detailed settlement timeline in the public record. The Lucombe docket closes after a voluntary dismissal without prejudice. The order does not describe a settlement.

Public summaries for the Amur Equipment Finance case also do not lay out settlement figures or investor loss totals. Claims that investor losses sit in a specific multi-million dollar band come from unsourced law-marketing blogs rather than court documents or major news outlets, so those numbers do not appear here.

7. Current Status

As of late 2025, Direct Fairways LLC continues to operate and to advertise golf-related marketing services. The BBB profile remains active and still lists a pattern of complaints.

No federal court has entered a final TCPA judgment against Direct Fairways. No certified nationwide class action against the company appears in PACER summaries.

Additional Case Details

You should weigh the complaint record in context. BBB shows hundreds of complaints, yet it also records resolutions in many files. The company often responds and states that it shipped materials, honored a production window, and kept ads in place after cancellation as part of a compromise.

Employee-review sites add another layer. Indeed and Glassdoor both show mixed but often positive reviews of Direct Fairways as a workplace. Overall ratings sit in the four-star range in recent snapshots, and many employees praise pay, work-life balance, and management.

You see a gap between golf course advertising complaints and employee praise. That kind of gap can appear when a sales-driven company runs aggressive campaigns that some customers dislike, while some staff still value the pay structure. The law focuses on specific practices rather than broad reputation scores.

You should talk to a lawyer if you feel harmed by Direct Fairways marketing or by similar golf course advertising complaints. A lawyer can review your contracts, invoices, and call records and can explain deadlines under federal and state law.

Final Summary

Direct Fairways sits under a real but limited lawsuit record. One TCPA case in Florida ended without a merits ruling. A commercial financing case in 2022 raised contract issues. Hundreds of BBB complaints point to recurring friction over money, promises, and delivery. You do not see a sweeping court judgment that settles every allegation. You see a company that draws sharp criticism and a legal history that still leaves many questions open.

Disclaimer: All information in this article comes from verified public sources, including the Better Business Bureau complaints and business profile pages for Direct Fairways LLC, federal court docket summaries, and recognized legal-records aggregators that reproduce public filings. Nothing in this article relies on assumptions, predictions, or personal opinions. The article does not offer legal advice. If you need corrections or additional details, you should contact our team through the site’s contact page so we can review new documents or updated court records.