Allstate Class Action Lawsuits 2026, Four Active Cases — Data Spying, Overcharged Premiums, Agent Misclassification & More

All Four Active Allstate Cases

Case 1 — Allstate Driver Data Spying: 45 Million Americans Tracked Without Consent

What This Case Is About

The Allstate privacy lawsuit alleges that Allstate and its subsidiary Arity have conspired to illegally build the world’s largest driving behavior database by secretly collecting data on at least 45 million Americans through third-party mobile apps — without their knowledge or consent.

Morgan & Morgan and Clifford Law Offices filed what appears to be the first class action on January 14, 2025, in federal district court in Chicago. The complaint alleges Allstate undertook this data collection effort to increase its profits at the expense of unaware consumers and their privacy.

How It Allegedly Worked

Allstate paid developers to integrate Arity’s data collection software into their mobile apps, including Life360, GasBuddy, Routely, and Fuel Rewards. Allstate chose these apps because they use features relying on location information and frequently request users’ permission to access location data.

Arity’s software operated in the background of these apps and collected vast amounts of data including geolocation, accelerometer, magnetometer, gyroscopic data, altitude, longitude, latitude, bearing, GPS time, speed, and accuracy.

Once collected, Allstate marketed and sold the data to other insurance corporations and entities. Insurers secretly used the data to justify increasing consumers’ car insurance premiums, denying them coverage, or dropping them from coverage entirely.

The lawsuit also claims that Allstate bought driving data directly from car manufacturers such as Toyota, Lexus, Mazda, Chrysler, Dodge, Fiat, Jeep, Maserati, and Ram.

Who May Be Affected

Plaintiffs seek to represent anyone in the U.S. whose data was collected by Allstate through the Arity software development kit, with state subclasses covering residents of Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas.

If you have ever used Life360, GasBuddy, Routely, Fuel Rewards, or SiriusXM, your driving data may have been collected and sold.

Regulatory Action

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a separate state lawsuit against Allstate and Arity, alleging violations of the Texas Data Privacy and Security Act, the Texas Data Broker Law, and deceptive acts in the business of insurance. Paxton’s investigation revealed Allstate and Arity paid mobile apps millions of dollars to install their tracking software.

Legal Claims

Plaintiffs allege violations of the Federal Wiretap Act, Stored Communications Act, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and various state privacy laws. They seek class certification, damages, fees, costs, and a jury trial.

Current Status & Settlement

No settlement exists. Attorneys working with ClassAction.org have finished their investigation into this matter and the case is in active litigation. No claim process is available at this time. If a settlement is reached, it will be posted here with claim instructions and deadlines.

Case: Arellano et al. v. The Allstate Corp. et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-01256, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Case 2 — Allstate Agent Misclassification: Trial Set for June 2026

What This Case Is About

Wallace Miller is pursuing a class action alleging that Allstate illegally misclassified its “exclusive agent” workforce in California as independent contractors — rather than employees — causing agents to incur business expenses that should have been paid by Allstate.

The lawsuit alleges this violated California Labor Code § 2802, which requires employers to reimburse employees for all necessary job-related expenses.

Who Is Affected

Individuals who worked as exclusive agents with Allstate and had to pay business expenses on behalf of the company may be eligible to participate. The class consists of 966 class members. This case is limited to California Allstate agents.

Latest Updates

In March 2025, a federal district judge granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, appointing Wallace Miller’s clients as class representatives. Allstate petitioned the Ninth Circuit for immediate review of the certification — the Ninth Circuit denied the request in September 2025.

The opt-out period has closed. Non-expert fact discovery is set to close and a trial is scheduled for June 2026.

Current Status & Settlement

No settlement exists. Trial is scheduled for June 2026. The class is closed to new members — opt-out period has ended. Current and former Allstate exclusive agents in California who did not opt out are bound by the outcome.

Case: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Case 3 — Allstate Homeowners Overcharged: $4M Settlement, No Claim Form Needed

What This Case Is About

Allstate agreed to pay $4,000,000 to resolve a class action over its alleged “double counting” of built-in garage square footage when calculating California homeowners’ insurance policies — causing consumers to be overcharged on their premiums.

The lawsuit alleged Allstate overestimated the square footage of certain California homes by including built-in garages in both “total finished living area” and “total living area” counts simultaneously.

Who Is Eligible

The settlement covers all California homeowners with Allstate homeowners’ insurance policies whose homes, per Allstate’s records, have a built-in garage and whose policy was included in Allstate’s Project UIN 203019 corrective action process, which increased the recorded square footage to reflect actual or potential double-counting of garage space.

How Payments Work

No claim form is required. Class members who did not exclude themselves will automatically receive a settlement payment by mail after the court grants final approval.

Settlement awards are calculated based on the number of built-in garage bays, the policy years affected, the location of the insured property, and the collected premium.

Current Status

The settlement received preliminary approval on September 4, 2025. The final approval hearing was scheduled for December 2, 2025. Allstate denies wrongdoing. No action is required from class members — payments go out automatically.

Case: Hilario v. Allstate Insurance Co., Case No. 3:20-cv-05459-WHO, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California Questions: [email protected] — 312-955-0545

Case 4 — Louisiana Total Loss Auto Claims: Settlement Closed

This settlement resolved a lawsuit claiming Allstate breached its auto insurance policies by failing to pay sales tax and transfer fees to Louisiana policyholders who submitted first-party total loss auto claims. The court entered a Final Order and Judgment Approving Class Settlement on February 10, 2025. This case is closed. No new claims are accepted.

The Settled Cases: Historical Reference

$25M California Auto Rating Settlement (Stevenson v. Allstate — Closed) This lawsuit alleged Allstate improperly used price optimization — policyholders’ willingness to tolerate a price increase — as a factor in calculating premiums for over 1.2 million California auto policyholders. The $25 million settlement received final court approval in May 2024. Claims are closed.

$3.3M Call Recording Settlement (Closed) Allstate agreed to pay $3.3 million to resolve claims it recorded consumer calls without consent in violation of California’s Invasion of Privacy Act. The claim deadline was October 30, 2024 — closed.

What Consumers Should Do Right Now

If you used Life360, GasBuddy, Routely, Fuel Rewards, or SiriusXM and have noticed your car insurance premiums increase unexpectedly, you may be among the 45 million Americans whose driving data was collected and sold. While no claim process exists yet in the Arity data case, you should:

• Document your premium increases with screenshots and renewal notices
• Check your app permissions — revoke location access for apps you don’t explicitly need it for
• Monitor this page for settlement updates in the Arity driving data case
• Contact a consumer privacy attorney at no cost to understand your options

FAQs

Is there a single Allstate class action settlement I can file a claim for right now? 

The $4M homeowners settlement (Project UIN) requires no claim form — eligible California homeowners receive automatic payments. All other active Allstate cases are in litigation with no settlement or claim process available yet.

I used GasBuddy or Life360 — am I in the data lawsuit?

 If your data was collected by Allstate through the Arity SDK embedded in those apps, you may be a class member. No claim process exists yet. Monitor this page for updates.

Did Allstate admit wrongdoing in any case? 

No. Allstate has denied wrongdoing in every settled and active case. Settlements do not constitute admissions of liability.

I’m a former Allstate exclusive agent in California — can I still join the misclassification case?

 The opt-out period has closed. If you were an Allstate exclusive agent in California and did not opt out, you are already part of the 966-member class and will be bound by the trial outcome or any future settlement.

When will the Arity data privacy case settle? 

No timeline has been set. This case was filed in early 2025 and is in early litigation stages. Data privacy class actions of this scale typically take two to four years to reach settlement.

Are these cases related to Allstate’s Drivewise program? 

The Arity lawsuit is separate from Drivewise — Drivewise is an opt-in telematics program. The Arity case involves data collected from unrelated third-party apps without consumers’ knowledge or explicit consent for insurance purposes.

For context on similar insurance company privacy cases, see AllAboutLawyer.com’s coverage of the $8.7M Sequoia Benefits & Insurance data breach settlement and the $9.95M Gen Digital settlement — both involving consumer data exploitation by large corporations.

By AllAboutLawyer.com Staff | Last Updated: March 5, 2026

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Legal claims and outcomes depend on specific facts and applicable law. For advice regarding a particular situation, consult a qualified attorney.

About the Author

Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah