JPMorgan (JPM) Lawsuit, Multiple Class Actions Filed Over Credit Card Fraud, Interest Rate Fixing, Data Breaches & Employment Discrimination—What Chase Customers Need to Know
JPMorgan Chase faces multiple active class action lawsuits in 2026, including allegations of fraudulent credit card membership charges (filed October 2025), participation in a 30-year interest rate-fixing conspiracy with six other major banks (filed October 2025), employment discrimination through “fake interviews” of Black candidates (filed December 2025), and unlawful tobacco surcharges violating ERISA (filed January 2026). Separate data breach and ERISA health plan litigation also remain active. Here’s what consumers, employees, and account holders need to know about these ongoing cases.
The lawsuits target America’s largest bank across consumer protection, antitrust, civil rights, and employee benefits violations. None have reached settlement yet, but affected parties should preserve documentation now.
What the JPM Lawsuits Allege
Credit Card Membership Fraud Case
Anthony Sacchi filed a class action lawsuit on October 2, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:25-cv-07632) alleging JPMorgan Chase fraudulently induced consumers to purchase credit card memberships by promising automatic credits for certain purchases but failing to deliver.
According to the complaint, Chase solicited Sacchi in summer 2025 to purchase a one-year credit card membership for $750. The bank allegedly promised automatic credits for purchases at specified restaurants and online music services.
Sacchi claims he relied on these promises when applying for the card and making qualifying purchases. However, Chase allegedly failed to reimburse the specified charges, forcing him to pay them as part of his monthly statement to avoid interest, late fees, and penalties.
The lawsuit alleges this practice is part of a systematic plan by JPMorgan Chase to induce consumers to pay for credit card memberships and make specific purchases, only to deny them the promised credits.
Sacchi seeks to represent anyone who made charges on a JPMorgan Chase-issued credit card in the United States for products or services that should have been automatically credited pursuant to the company’s promises but were not.
The plaintiff is represented by Stephen J. Simoni of Simoni Consumers Class Action Law Offices and seeks class certification, damages, fees, costs, and a jury trial.
Interest Rate Fixing Conspiracy
Tracy Normandin and J. Allen Sensabaugh filed a class action lawsuit on October 16, 2025, in U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut (Case No. 3:25-cv-01749) against JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citibank, U.S. Bank, PNC Bank, and Truist Bank.
The lawsuit alleges these major banks colluded to fix interest rates on consumer and small-business loans for more than 30 years by conspiring to fix, raise, and stabilize prime rates charged to their most creditworthy customers.
According to the complaint, the banks’ collusion was facilitated by the Federal Reserve’s decision to begin publishing explicit targets for the federal funds rate in 1994, which allowed the banks to peg their prime rates to these publicly available benchmarks.
The plaintiffs argue the conspiracy persisted despite significant changes in the banking industry over the past 30 years, including regulatory reforms and digital transformation.
The lawsuit claims the banks’ collusion is a per se violation of federal antitrust laws and seeks treble damages for alleged overcharges on millions of consumer and business loans.
The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys from Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP.
Employment Discrimination—”Fake Interviews” Allegations
A plaintiff filed a proposed class action lawsuit on December 11, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Detroit division (Jackson v. JPMorgan Chase & Co.), alleging the bank subjected Black job candidates to “fake interviews” as part of its “performative” approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
The plaintiff, who has more than two decades of experience in the financial services industry, claims Chase passed him over for a White candidate with less experience after conducting seemingly perfunctory interviews and never requesting a resume.
According to court documents, an executive recruiter reached out in May 2024 about a managing director/regional executive opportunity nearly identical to a position the plaintiff held for Bank of America.
The lawsuit alleges race discrimination under state and federal civil rights law, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The plaintiff claims JPMorgan Chase’s behavior is part of the bank’s decades-long “unbroken pattern of systemic race discrimination against African Americans, including against its Black customers, employees, and applicants.”
According to the lawsuit, “Chase’s treatment of [the plaintiff] appears to be part of an insidious practice of fake interviews. Fake interviews occur when a company wants to appear to honor diversity but does not have a genuine commitment to diversity.”
Similar to employment issues raised in AT&T class action lawsuit sending $7,500 settlement checks, corporate accountability for discriminatory practices continues driving major litigation in 2026.
Tobacco Surcharge ERISA Violation
Robyn D. Carmichael filed a class action lawsuit on January 21, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:26-cv-00305) accusing JPMorgan Chase of unlawfully imposing punitive health insurance surcharges on employees who use tobacco products.
Carmichael claims JPMorgan violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) by unfairly targeting employees based on their health status, specifically tobacco use.
According to the complaint, Chase charged a “tobacco surcharge” that unjustly forced certain employees to pay higher premiums for health and other insurances provided by the company.
The plaintiff argues tobacco surcharges must adhere to specific rules set forth by ERISA and related regulations, which Chase allegedly violated.
The plaintiff is represented by Chirinos Law Firm PLLC, Walcheske & Luzi LLC, and Bloom Legal LLC.
What You Must Know
ERISA Health Plan Fiduciary Breach Case
On March 13, 2025, a class action complaint was filed against JP Morgan Chase and its medical plan fiduciaries in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for engaging in prohibited transactions and breaching their ERISA fiduciary duties (Stern v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., et al.).
This complaint is similar to lawsuits filed against Johnson & Johnson and Wells Fargo alleging health plan fiduciaries failed to properly manage employee benefit plans.
A hearing on JPMorgan’s motion to dismiss is scheduled for February 13, 2026, before Judge Jennifer L. Rochon.
Data Breach Litigation Risk
In December 2025, JPMorgan Chase reported that a package containing sensitive customer information went missing during transit from their Billerica, Massachusetts branch to their processing facility.
The package, containing checks and paperwork from transactions processed around October 10, 2025, included personal information such as names, addresses, and account numbers.
While Chase is actively working with the courier to locate and re-route the package, affected individuals may have grounds for transunion data breach class action lawsuits similar to those filed against other financial institutions.
A separate data breach investigation is underway involving JPMorgan Chase via law firm Fried Frank, where sensitive personally identifiable information may have been exposed.
What These Cases Mean for Chase Customers
JPMorgan Chase denies wrongdoing in all pending cases but faces mounting legal pressure across multiple fronts.
The credit card fraud allegations echo broader consumer protection concerns similar to Verizon class action lawsuit settlement customers promised $15 minimum got $2.37 instead, where promised benefits failed to materialize.
The interest rate-fixing conspiracy, if proven, could impact millions of borrowers who paid inflated rates on consumer loans, mortgages, credit cards, and business loans for decades.
Consumer Protection Laws at Issue
The lawsuits invoke multiple federal and state consumer protection statutes:
Consumer Protection Violations: State consumer fraud acts prohibit deceptive business practices, false advertising, and unfair methods of competition. Remedies include actual damages, statutory damages, injunctive relief, and attorney fees.
Antitrust Violations: The Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits conspiracies to fix prices or restrain trade. Per se violations like price-fixing carry treble damages (three times actual damages), making the potential liability enormous for the seven banks if plaintiffs prevail.
Employment Discrimination Laws: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Violations can result in compensatory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and attorney fees.
ERISA Violations: The Employee Retirement Income Security Act imposes fiduciary duties on employers managing employee benefit plans. Breaches can result in plan correction, removal of fiduciaries, and monetary damages.
What to Do Next
For Credit Card Membership Fraud Claims
If you purchased a JPMorgan Chase credit card membership with promises of automatic credits for specific purchases but were denied those credits:
Gather your credit card membership materials, promotional emails, and statements showing promises made by Chase. Save all credit card statements showing charges that should have been credited but weren’t. Document communications with Chase about missing credits, including dates, representatives spoken with, and what was discussed.
Track all additional interest, late fees, or penalties you paid because Chase failed to credit your account as promised.
The Sacchi lawsuit seeks class certification. If granted, eligible class members will receive notice and instructions on how to participate.
For Interest Rate Claims
If you had consumer loans, mortgages, credit cards, or business loans with JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citibank, U.S. Bank, PNC Bank, or Truist Bank:
Preserve loan documents showing interest rates charged, particularly prime rate-based variable rate loans. Save account statements from the past 30 years if available (statutes of limitations may limit how far back claims can reach). Document any communications about how your interest rate was calculated.
The Normandin lawsuit remains in early stages. Class certification has not yet been granted, but the case potentially covers millions of borrowers nationwide.
For Employment Discrimination Claims
If you are a Black job candidate who interviewed with JPMorgan Chase but believe you were subject to “performative” interviews while less qualified White candidates were hired:
Document your interview experiences, including dates, positions applied for, interviewers’ names, and any unusual aspects of the process. Preserve all communications with JPMorgan Chase recruiters and hiring managers. Save job descriptions, your resume, and qualifications that demonstrate you met or exceeded position requirements.
Note the qualifications and experience of the person ultimately hired if this information is available.
Consider contacting the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to file a discrimination charge, which may be required before pursuing individual litigation.
For ERISA Tobacco Surcharge Claims
If you are a JPMorgan Chase employee charged tobacco surcharges for health insurance:
Review your health insurance enrollment materials and premium statements showing tobacco surcharges. Document the amount of surcharges paid and the time period covered. Check whether the surcharge structure complies with ERISA regulations limiting such charges.
The Carmichael lawsuit was just filed in January 2026 and has not yet been certified as a class action.
Monitor Case Developments
Check court dockets through PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) at pacer.gov for updates on:
- Credit card case: 1:25-cv-07632 (S.D.N.Y.)
- Interest rate case: 3:25-cv-01749 (D. Conn.)
- Employment discrimination: Jackson v. JPMorgan Chase (E.D. Mich.)
- Tobacco surcharge: 1:26-cv-00305 (S.D.N.Y.)
- ERISA health plan: Stern v. JPMorgan Chase (S.D.N.Y.)
Watch for class certification orders, settlement announcements, and claim filing deadlines.
When to Consult an Attorney
Consider consulting a qualified attorney if:
- You suffered substantial documented losses from any alleged JPMorgan Chase practices
- You’re considering opting out of a certified class action to pursue individual litigation
- You need advice about employment discrimination claims and EEOC procedures
- You’re unsure whether you qualify for any pending class actions
Most consumer protection and employment attorneys offer free initial consultations.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is JPMorgan Chase being sued for?
JPMorgan Chase faces multiple active class action lawsuits alleging credit card membership fraud (failing to provide promised automatic credits), participation in a 30-year conspiracy with six other banks to fix interest rates on consumer and business loans, employment discrimination through “fake interviews” of Black candidates, and unlawful tobacco surcharges that violate ERISA employee benefit laws.
Can I join the JPM class action lawsuits?
Class certification has not yet been granted in any of these cases. If you believe you were affected, preserve all documentation now. If classes are certified, affected individuals will receive notice with instructions on how to participate, object, or opt out.
Has JPMorgan Chase admitted wrongdoing?
No. JPMorgan Chase denies all allegations in these lawsuits but has not yet publicly commented on all pending cases. The bank has not admitted liability in any of the active litigation.
What damages are being sought in these lawsuits?
The credit card fraud case seeks actual damages and statutory penalties. The interest rate-fixing case seeks treble damages (triple the actual overcharges) under federal antitrust laws. The employment discrimination case seeks compensatory and punitive damages. The tobacco surcharge case seeks plan correction and monetary damages. Exact amounts will depend on class sizes and proof of harm.
When will these cases be resolved?
Class action litigation typically takes 2-5 years from filing to resolution. The credit card case (filed October 2025) and interest rate case (filed October 2025) are in early stages. The employment discrimination case (filed December 2025) and tobacco surcharge case (filed January 2026) just began. Expect motion practice, discovery, and potential settlement negotiations throughout 2026-2027.
What should I do if I’m affected?
Preserve all relevant documentation including account statements, loan documents, credit card membership materials, employment application records, or health insurance premium statements. Monitor court dockets for case developments. Consider consulting an attorney if you suffered substantial damages. Do not destroy any records that might be relevant to these cases.
Are there settlement checks being sent?
No. None of these cases have reached settlement as of January 2026. All litigation remains active. If settlements are reached, affected class members will receive notice with claim filing instructions and deadlines.
Last Updated: January 24, 2026
Disclaimer: This article provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice.
If you’re a JPMorgan Chase customer or employee affected by any of these alleged practices, document everything now and stay informed about case developments that could impact your rights.
Stay informed, stay protected. — AllAboutLawyer.com
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