Skip to main content

Unclear Figma billing practices


Show first post

It’s ridiculous that Figma charges extra if a user with a professional license invites another user (also with a professional license) to collaborate on a project. This goes against one of their core values that the product is supposed to enhance collaboration.

I am actually considering moving over to Sketch because of this awful billing practive.


I agree! It’s so stupid.


Also very upset about this. I’m a freelancer and suddenly my Figma bill had doubled. Turns out that it was because I had given another freelancer edit access? At no point was it mentioned that this would mean I would pay for an extra seat. What’s even more egregious is that she already pays for her own account? Super shady practice on Figma’s part. Additionally I found it exceptionally counterintuitive to be able to navigate to the billing screen. Like I had to google how to get there— no idea why Figma makes it so insanely difficult?


Andy_Nelson_The_Positive_Caree

I also note that despite having the qty of design seatws as 0 I am going to be invoiced 132GBP.

AND having found this thread realised that my use case for Figma (collaborating with my coachees during our sessions) is goig to cost many X the $5 a month I had thought.

Now looking to get support to cancel upgrade and seek refund


B_K
  • September 5, 2024

A few years ago we were like 'wow! shut up and take my money Figma!". We wanted to buy our first paid seat, despite the fact that the free seat was great and more than enough. Opposite of what it is today.
I remember looking long and wide, and COULD NOT FIND a way to give Figma some of our hard earned cash.

Quite a change in strategy.
This is the Adobe Figma way.


Pooka_Co
  • September 10, 2024

I’ve just been through a similar discussion in private support. Figma’s current approach is basically to double charge people who wish to collaborate. It’s a terrible customer experience and should be fixed.

Either offer free collaboration (editing) between paid accounts, or if it really is expensive service for Figma to provide, make an explicit charge, e.g. £2 per month per project.


Brian_Steinseifer

Why am I unable to give another PAID SUBSCRIBER edit access without my account getting charged for another design seat??? I keep realizing I’m paying for extra seats without my knowledge.


Season1
  • September 16, 2024

I was charged unexpectedly on 16th September of $280 for 50 seats. Initially I applied 1 seat of $15 on August. However, the Figma account upgraded me to 50 seats without any notice. I have never shared files in the new team to so many people. It should be a bug that it automatically brought related people in the history file on second month.

Hence, I claim a refund on the matter.

In addition, for the 1st time of subscription on August, I had to untick all 50 seats one by one (No batch deletion) so that I can apply a new team with 1 seat. Then the following months, it still automatically add up to 50 seats. How poorly designed is this flow.

I think the Figma should no longer ignore the biling issue. Don’t bring this unpleasure experience to your user.

I still remember when Figma first came to the market, you said you would always focus on experience and make free tools for designers. Now the billing bugs start to drift away from your initial visions.

Please refund in this case and start to listen to your users on these bad cases!

ticket [#1124093]


dvaliao
Figmate
  • Community Support
  • September 16, 2024

Hey @Season1, sorry for the frustration!

I can confirm that our support team received both of your requests on ticket #124065 and #1124093 (as you already provided). We escalated your 1st ticket on your behalf, and our team is already reviewing your account. Someone from support will reach out to you as soon as they can.


Season1
  • September 18, 2024

Hi Dvaliao,

Thank you for your reply. The Figma Support team has processed very efficiently in this case. Much appreciated! In addition, to help Figma product team better understand this case. I can provide more details of the flow.

First of all, I have shared the file in the new team to 7 people, and they are all viewer access. None of them upgraded themselves. The bugs appeared first time I applied for 1 seat of Figma Editor Access of a new team. The interface automatically showed and ticked 1 editor seat & 47 FigJam seats. I guess it’s related to some history file sharing access. I had no idea why 47 FigJam seats appeared though because I did’t create any FigJam Files for a long time. Therefore, I untick all 47 FigJam seats one by one.

The payment wasn’t charged successfully the first time, and then I went through this process again unticking 47 FigJam seats one by one because there were no batch deletion. It was very frustrating.

I used the account of 1 Editor seat for the first month quite smoothy, cost $15. However on the second months when the bill came. I found that the seats adding up to 3 editor seats and 47 FigJam Seats again without any operation.

I think there must be a flaw in the flow in the case. Please revise the flow and fix it.

  1. Revise the flow of history file access and new subscription, confirm with users if they still want to keep the old access of files transferred from other teams
  2. Add batch deletion of default account displayed when user apply for subscription
  3. Revise the flow of 1st month subscription and the subscription of the following month

Hope it won’t happen again.

Many thanks,
Jie


Viet_Le1
  • September 23, 2024

@dvaliao I just realized I’ve been getting billed for 5 seats for at least a year. I am also an independent designer. The crazy part is that all of the other agencies I’m working with have their own company accounts. So…Figma is double charging both sides for things we’re already paying for. How the hell are we supposed to handoff a design cross-company/agencies then? God knows how many indy designers you guys are fleecing due to the same scenarios.

Would it kill you guys to pop up a warning that a seat will be added when inviting someone to share the file? You guys are straight up stealing from people trying to make a living. I’ve never received a notification of increased seats without my consent…ever. Now I dont know WTF to do because if I disable the access, the agencies will lose their access to the files. You guys are the dumbest smart people ever. Jesus…


cai1
  • September 25, 2024

I recently shared one of my design files with a client, and my client then shared the link with her team. Unbeknownst to me, this action resulted in the automatic addition of more editors, which I now understand has led to an upgrade to a Professional Team plan with five seats, resulting in a significant charge. I was never informed or alerted that adding additional editors would lead to extra costs beyond my current subscription.

I have already cancelled the plan and submitted a refund request, as it was applied without my explicit consent.

ticket [#1132150]


dvaliao
Figmate
  • Community Support
  • September 25, 2024

Hey @cai1,

We can confirm that our support team received two support requests from you on tickets #1132163 and #1132150. Someone will review your account and be in touch soon.


Honestly, I think a legal case can be made against Figma here as the government cracks down on these dark billing patterns. You shouldn’t be charged for something someone else did, it should prompt you or charge them (with permission - don’t charge anything until the user okays it).

I bet if Sketch suddenly released a web based alternative tomorrow and had all your features with simple billing they would gain a lot of the market back. Figma has soured its relation with customers the past few years. There’s a clear disconnect between what the designers want and what the product is pandering to (investors) and lack of communication as to what’s being worked on (nothing against support, I feel sorry for them as they have to be the frontline of silly decisions made beyond them). I hope the Figma team realizes that they aren’t above being replaced and focus on what the customers want and the core piece: Figma.


ahainen
  • New Participant
  • September 26, 2024

When you grant someone Edit access, it is not clear and stated in that moment that your payment is about to increase. That’s my core issue. If there were big red flags that said, “Hey you can grant edit access BUT this is what will happen to your money” then I’m on board. Otherwise, it’s sketchy and dark and manipulative.


Brian_Steinseifer

So shady that they get away with double-billing everybody, especially when independent designers don’t even realize it’s happening. Fingers crossed they face legal consequences real soon!


Brian_Steinseifer

This x1000. Figma needs to face legal action over this.


Beatriz
  • October 14, 2024

This is a scam. Professionals around the world face the same situation and they are finding out outrageous invoices because of these dark practices. How many of you have upgraded your account thinking you will be able to edit files shared with you just to find out after paying that it doesn’t work like that? Figma is being unclear on purpose to make their double billing business.


Pete_Burden

I agree - terrible customer experience.

This, in my view, is a crazy and limiting model in a world where many people work outside of organisations - as consultants, coaches, advisors and the like.

Personally, I work with a variety of other people, in a variety of teams. Always have and always will. Sometimes as many as 6 teams at a time.

I already have a paid seat for FigJam and they are asking me to pay for a paid seat in every single team I am part of.

At least in Miro I can get a work around - from my paid seat I can share a board publicly but with a password.

I haven’t checked out Mural yet but I will. Because this, for me, is a deal breaker in renewing and also recommending FigJam.

Because as I work with multiple teams I also have the option of recommending a whiteboard solution to every team I work with!

Thanks for any suggestions.


Lloyd_Steven

I was such an advocate for Figma before I learned about this billing practice. I was literally singing its praises to peers, basically marketing the product for free. Now I don’t even think I’ll continue using the product. Disgusting.


Use
  • November 12, 2024

It is a Dark Design pattern to base your billing system based on View Access as opposed to Edit Access.

Good design is opt out by default not opt in by default. When I send a view access request, good UX and System design means that the wording/text in the request benign sent should match the result of the action the user performs. The text “View access” is not the same “Edit Access”. I should not be charged for a design seat simply because I want a client to view a file.

This is an issue that has been reported/commented on numerous times by other end users. Why is this still an almost a year later? Are you hiring developers who are building features without flags?


David_Jeffrey

+1 Figma please take a look at this. I’m happy to share editor with a client or outside collaborator if they request it, but I expect them to be prompted ot create their own paid account.

If I want to add a paid seat to my organisation for a new staff member, I’ll clearly go ahead and do that.

It’s something you should fix pretty urgently. It’s extremely bad. The product itself is great. This = terrible oversight. An urgent fix is required.


Langmate

Figma billing practice is WAY WORSE than Adobe.

You pay for 1 soft, with files somewhere in a cloud, taxed every time you simply want to share with a client or a team member (OMG, pros do that?).
Sharing is a basic need for designers, not an extra feature.

I have a good idea for you Figma: what about charging us to save .fig files locally?
That’s a wonderfully greedy idea, isn’t it?
Pff.


Daniel3
  • November 26, 2024

This is some baloney. A paid account needs to pay per team worked on?


Reply


Cookie policy

We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

 
Cookie settings