Class Action by Status
'closed' Listing
McAfee (Auto Renewal) »
Defendant: McAfee
Consumers who purchased McAfee or Intel Security software between January 10, 2010 and February 10, 2015 and paid an auto-renewal charge that was a higher price than the initial software purchase may be eligible for $11.50 cash or $11.50 McAfee certificate. Consumers who purchased McAfee or Intel Security software between… Read More »
McAfee (Auto Renewal) »
Defendant: McAfee
Consumers who purchased McAfee or Intel Security software between January 10, 2010 and February 10, 2015 and paid an auto-renewal charge that was a higher price than the initial software purchase may be eligible for $11.50 cash or $11.50 McAfee certificate. Consumers who purchased McAfee or Intel Security software between January 10, 2010 and February 10, 2015 and renewed manually at higher price than the initial software purchase may be eligible for $11.50 cash or $11.50 McAfee certificate. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violating California’s Automatic Renewal Law.
×Wells Fargo (TCPA Home) »
Defendant: Wells Fargo
Consumers who received automated or prerecorded call on their cell phones from Wells Fargo regarding residential mortgage accounts between November 17, 2011 and February 29, 2016 may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $16 million settlement. Consumers who received automated or prerecorded call on their cell phones… Read More »
Wells Fargo (TCPA Home) »
Defendant: Wells Fargo
Consumers who received automated or prerecorded call on their cell phones from Wells Fargo regarding residential mortgage accounts between November 17, 2011 and February 29, 2016 may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $16 million settlement. Consumers who received automated or prerecorded call on their cell phones from Wells Fargo regarding home equity loan accounts between April 14, 2011 and February 29, 2016 may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $16 million settlement. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×Starbucks (Breakfast Sandwich) »
Defendant: Starbucks
Consumers who bought certain breakfast sandwiches at a Starbucks store in California between April 28, 2015 and August 17, 2015 may be eligible for $0.25 coupon code per sandwich purchased. The company agreed to a settlement over allegations of charging more than the listed price of the breakfast sandwiches. Read More »
Starbucks (Breakfast Sandwich) »
Defendant: Starbucks
Consumers who bought certain breakfast sandwiches at a Starbucks store in California between April 28, 2015 and August 17, 2015 may be eligible for $0.25 coupon code per sandwich purchased. The company agreed to a settlement over allegations of charging more than the listed price of the breakfast sandwiches.
×DeVry (False Advertising) »
Defendant: DeVry
Students who paid for DeVry classes between January 1, 2008 and September 30, 2015 may be eligible for partial refunds and loan forgiveness and cancellation. DeVry agreed to a $100 million settlement over allegations of deceptive advertising the employment rate and income of its graduates. Read More »
DeVry (False Advertising) »
Defendant: DeVry
Source: https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/blog/devry-settles-claims-deceptive-advertising-100-million
Students who paid for DeVry classes between January 1, 2008 and September 30, 2015 may be eligible for partial refunds and loan forgiveness and cancellation. DeVry agreed to a $100 million settlement over allegations of deceptive advertising the employment rate and income of its graduates.
×Clark County Collection Service, LLC (TCPA) »
Defendant: Clark County Collection Service, LLC
Consumers who received automated call on their cell phones from Clark County Collection Service, LLC between September 20, 2009 and September 20, 2013 as a result of being listed as a reference on Dollar Loan Center, LLC application may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $8 million… Read More »
Clark County Collection Service, LLC (TCPA) »
Defendant: Clark County Collection Service, LLC
Consumers who received automated call on their cell phones from Clark County Collection Service, LLC between September 20, 2009 and September 20, 2013 as a result of being listed as a reference on Dollar Loan Center, LLC application may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $8 million settlement. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×Hollister (Gift Cards) »
Defendant: Hollister and Abercrombie & Fitch
Consumers who received promotional gift cards without an expiration date from Hollister, Gilly Hicks, or Abercrombie & Fitch as part of promotions during 2009 and 2010 that still had unused balance when the cards got voided will be eligible for 70% of the original remaining value of the promotional cards. … Read More »
Hollister (Gift Cards) »
Defendant: Hollister and Abercrombie & Fitch
Consumers who received promotional gift cards without an expiration date from Hollister, Gilly Hicks, or Abercrombie & Fitch as part of promotions during 2009 and 2010 that still had unused balance when the cards got voided will be eligible for 70% of the original remaining value of the promotional cards. Class members must keep their original promotional gift cards to receive the 70% of the original remaining value.
The Court approved the settlement on March 3, 2017. The cards are redeemable for 6 months after April 18, 2017.
×Audi (Emissions-Cheating Software) »
Defendant: Audi
Alleges that Audi fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the certain Audi vehicles with 3.0-liter gasoline engines are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by law. The case is… Read More »
Audi (Emissions-Cheating Software) »
Defendant: Audi
Source: https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/audi-emissions-cheating
Alleges that Audi fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the certain Audi vehicles with 3.0-liter gasoline engines are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by law. The case is Greenfield et al v. Audi of America, LLC and Audi AG, Case No. 1:16-cv-10456, in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
×Fiat Chrysler (Emissions-Cheating Software) »
Defendant: Fiat Chrysler
Alleges that Fiat Chrysler fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the 2500 and 3500 Dodge RAM trucks are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by law. The case is… Read More »
Fiat Chrysler (Emissions-Cheating Software) »
Defendant: Fiat Chrysler
Source: https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/dodge-ram-2500-emissions
Alleges that Fiat Chrysler fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the 2500 and 3500 Dodge RAM trucks are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by law. The case is Bledsoe et al v. FCA US LLC and Cummins Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-14024-TGB-RSW, in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.
×GeForce (GTX 970 Graphics Chip) »
Defendant: GeForce
Consumers who bought GTX 970 device between September 1, 2014 and August 24, 2016 may be eligible for $30 cash for each qualifying unit. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising the specifications, capabilities and performance of the product. Read More »
GeForce (GTX 970 Graphics Chip) »
Defendant: GeForce
Consumers who bought GTX 970 device between September 1, 2014 and August 24, 2016 may be eligible for $30 cash for each qualifying unit. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising the specifications, capabilities and performance of the product.
×Appstack (TCPA) »
Defendant: Appstack
Consumers who received automated or prerecorded call on their cell phones from Appstack on or after August 27, 2009 may be eligible for payment in the range between $40 and $100. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Read More »
Appstack (TCPA) »
Defendant: Appstack
Consumers who received automated or prerecorded call on their cell phones from Appstack on or after August 27, 2009 may be eligible for payment in the range between $40 and $100. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×Citizens Bank (Home Equity Lines of Credit or “HELOC”) »
Defendant: Citizens Bank
Alleges that Citizens Bank accelerated the repayment of HELOC and increased the minimum payment contrary to the HELOC agreements. HELOC borrowers in either the draw period or repayment period who opened the account between June 23, 2005 and July 8, 2006 may be eligible to choose the calculation method for… Read More »
Citizens Bank (Home Equity Lines of Credit or “HELOC”) »
Defendant: Citizens Bank
Alleges that Citizens Bank accelerated the repayment of HELOC and increased the minimum payment contrary to the HELOC agreements. HELOC borrowers in either the draw period or repayment period who opened the account between June 23, 2005 and July 8, 2006 may be eligible to choose the calculation method for the repayment of HELOC.
×Blackboard Connect Inc. (TCPA) »
Defendant: Blackboard Connect Inc.
Consumers who received unauthorized text messages or calls through Blackboard Equipment between December 22, 2010 and September 1, 2016 may be eligible for up to $60 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Read More »
Blackboard Connect Inc. (TCPA) »
Defendant: Blackboard Connect Inc.
Consumers who received unauthorized text messages or calls through Blackboard Equipment between December 22, 2010 and September 1, 2016 may be eligible for up to $60 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×First American (Title Insurance) »
Defendant: First American Title Insurance Company
Residential home buyers who purchased title insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company through certain title insurance agents between June 12, 2006 and May 11, 2016 pay be eligible for $75. First American reached a settlement over allegations of First American paying unlawful benefits to certain title insurance agents… Read More »
First American (Title Insurance) »
Defendant: First American Title Insurance Company
Residential home buyers who purchased title insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company through certain title insurance agents between June 12, 2006 and May 11, 2016 pay be eligible for $75. First American reached a settlement over allegations of First American paying unlawful benefits to certain title insurance agents in exchange of referrals to First American.
×GE Retail Capital Bank (TCPA) »
Defendant: GE Retail Capital Bank
Consumers who received automated call on their cell phones from Synchrony Bank between August 22, 2008 and June 16, 2016 may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $7 million settlement. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Read More »
GE Retail Capital Bank (TCPA) »
Defendant: GE Retail Capital Bank
Consumers who received automated call on their cell phones from Synchrony Bank between August 22, 2008 and June 16, 2016 may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $7 million settlement. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×Gannett Co., Inc. (TCPA) »
Defendant: Gannett Co., Inc.
Consumers who received automated call on their cell phones from Gannett Co., Inc. between January 2, 2010 and August 4, 2016 may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $13.8 million settlement. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Read More »
Gannett Co., Inc. (TCPA) »
Defendant: Gannett Co., Inc.
Consumers who received automated call on their cell phones from Gannett Co., Inc. between January 2, 2010 and August 4, 2016 may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $13.8 million settlement. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×