What’s the catch? Reports of unexpected charges — reported by 61 users.
Analyzed automatically from 3 independent signals that had to agree — not a hands-on test, and not human-reviewed.
This analysis describes version 219 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 219, updated 2026-06-23.
What the analysis found
The catch list 1
Charges we publish at a strength we stand behind: measured from an artefact, agreed by independent sources, or reported by enough users to clear that charge's own published bar.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Reports of unexpected charges
Was ripped off — I purchased the lifetime subscription to finally be rid of my addiction and they took my money but I can’t sign into my service that I’ve paid for. I want my money back.
Scammed out of my money — If I could rate this as 0 stars I would. I payed for a lifetime membership and it worked for a while on the app, then all of a sudden one day it stopped working and i contacted support. I spoke with the owner and…
Scammers — Signed up and it took my money (checked my bank account and verified) and it won’t let me sign in. Emailed their support and haven’t heard back. Very disappointing
Upgrade prompts use guilt-trip wording
Can’t login after paying for one year — I paid for a one year subscription, and spontaneously, I was signed out of my account and can no longer log back in. It prompts me to pay again and there is no “Log In” option on the homepage of the…
Horrible — Why do i always have to pay for a subscription like if im asking for help i get I gotta pay something but like legit 30$ a month bro yea no im good and i love how your add says free if your gonna do that just make people pay…
Useless — I spent $30 for a subscription and the app keeps asking me to pay again. I can’t even use it now. I contacted support and they sent me an activation link that simply didn’t work. When I was able to use it the app was ok but it…
Hard to cancel
Can’t cancel — The subscription is so hard to cancel and customer support is horrible they aren’t even answering me anymore.
Bad customer service and hard to cancel subscription — I signed up for a free trial and used the normal methods of canceling the subscription but they use a different difficult system good app itself tho
Scam — Don’t buy this up. It’s a scam after the free trial you can’t cancel the subscription emailed them multiple times. No response had to change my cards and everything.
Paywall blocks the basics
fr? — putting this behind a paywall is sick capitalist bs.
Ummm — Haven’t really used the app much, but it seems genuinely great so far. I hope I don’t have to pay for anything, though.
Scam — They partnered with a therapy company. So to use the app you’ll have to pay for the therapy before doing anything else. I’m deleting it. And it’s not worth it. They won’t allow you to skip it or decline it.
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.