Vivint Smart Home Faces Class Action Over Alleged Spam Emails and Secret Tracking of Website Visitors

Vivint Smart Home, Inc. is facing a federal class action lawsuit alleging the home security company sent unlawful, unsolicited marketing emails and calls — and secretly tracked the online behavior of website visitors without their knowledge or consent. The case, Robertson v. Vivint Smart Home, Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-01572, was filed on August 26, 2024, against the Utah-based home security giant. The lawsuit alleges violations of federal consumer privacy and telemarketing law, and could affect a nationwide class of consumers who were contacted or tracked without giving valid consent.

Quick Case Snapshot

Plaintiff	Robertson (and proposed class of affected consumers)
Defendant	Vivint Smart Home, Inc.
Court	U.S. District Court (District filed August 2024)
Case Number	2:24-cv-01572
Filing Date	August 26, 2024
Judge	Not yet publicly confirmed
Claims Alleged	Violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA); unlawful telemarketing; unauthorized tracking of website visitors; failure to obtain valid consent
Damages Sought	Statutory damages per violation; injunctive relief; attorney’s fees
Current Status	Active litigation; class certification not yet granted

What Happened: Spam Calls, Emails, and a Website That Allegedly Hid What It Was Doing

Vivint Smart Home faces a proposed class action lawsuit wherein a consumer claims to have received numerous unsolicited telemarketing calls and texts from the home security company, even though her phone number had been listed on the National Do Not Call Registry since 2023.

The plaintiff claims that despite never providing consent to be contacted by Vivint, she received six calls and 21 texts from the company in April and May 2024. She had no prior relationship with the company and had taken the affirmative step of registering on the Do Not Call list — the federal government’s official opt-out system — specifically to prevent exactly this kind of contact.

The website tracking angle is equally significant. According to the complaint, Vivint purported to have obtained the plaintiff’s phone number from a “lead” submission on VivintOffers.com, a website featuring a form through which consumers can request a free quote for a home security system. The filing alleges that the web form does not properly disclose to prospective customers that by requesting a quote, they are also signing up to receive telemarketing calls and texts from Vivint.

In plain terms: visitors to Vivint’s website who simply asked for a price quote allegedly had their personal information captured and were then subjected to aggressive marketing campaigns — without understanding that’s what they were agreeing to. The lawsuit contests that submission of the web form does not qualify under the TCPA as valid consent to be contacted.

Critically, the plaintiff says she never visited VivintOffers.com or provided her information through the website in any capacity — meaning her contact information may have been obtained through other undisclosed means and then used to market to her without any basis for consent.

Related article: Toyota Faces Class Action Over Defective 2025 Sienna Seat Rails — Thousands of Families Left Without a Safe Vehicle and No Fix in Sight

What the Lawsuit Alleges: “Annoying and Harassing” Marketing With No Valid Consent

The class action suit contends that the “annoying and harassing” calls and messages, which marketed Vivint’s home security systems and promotional offers, violated the plaintiff’s privacy rights under the TCPA. This federal law prohibits the initiation of more than one telephone solicitation within a one-year period to phone numbers listed on the National Do Not Call Registry without express consent.

The complaint raises two overlapping theories of liability that are worth understanding separately:

1. Spam Communications (Calls, Texts, and Emails): Vivint allegedly bombarded consumers with unsolicited telemarketing contacts despite those consumers being registered on the Do Not Call list and having given no valid consent to be reached.

2. Website Visitor Tracking Without Disclosure: The VivintOffers.com web form allegedly captured consumer information and fed it into a marketing pipeline without clearly telling visitors what would happen to their data. This is the “tracking” element of the case — the complaint suggests that Vivint’s digital infrastructure was designed to harvest visitor information for commercial use without adequate transparency.

The lawsuit looks to represent anyone in the United States who, at any time in the past four years, received two or more telemarketing calls or texts within any 12-month period from Vivint at least 31 days after listing their phone number on the National Do Not Call Registry. This is potentially a very large class — anyone in America who received unwanted Vivint marketing after registering on the Do Not Call list could qualify.

Vivint’s Response

Vivint has not issued a detailed public statement specifically addressing the Robertson lawsuit’s allegations. As is standard practice for newly filed class actions, the company is expected to file a responsive pleading — likely a motion to dismiss — challenging whether the plaintiff has stated a viable legal claim and whether class certification is appropriate.

Vivint has previously contested similar allegations. In prior TCPA-related cases, the company has argued that its lead-generation practices comply with applicable law and that any contacts were made based on consumer-provided information. Whether those defenses will succeed in this case remains to be determined in court.

This Is Not Vivint’s First Rodeo: A Pattern of Privacy Lawsuits

This lawsuit does not exist in a vacuum. Vivint has a documented history of legal action over its marketing and data practices — and that history matters when assessing what this new suit might mean.

FTC Action — $20 Million Settlement (2023): 

Vivint Smart Home agreed to pay $20 million to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations that the Utah-based firm misused the credit reports of entirely unaware third parties to help qualify prospective customers for financing. Consumers who did not sign up for Vivint services but had a Vivint account opened in their name between 2016 and 2019 were eligible for payments.

FCRA Class Action — $9.75 Million Settlement (2024): 

Vivint agreed to a $9.75 million class action settlement to resolve claims that it violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by accessing consumer credit information and using that data to create false accounts. Class members could receive up to $1,200 per fraudulent account that was subject to collection efforts.

Prior TCPA Settlement:

 In an earlier case, Vivint’s telemarketers were alleged to have violated the TCPA by using autodialing equipment and prerecorded messages to contact people throughout the country since 2008. That case settled, with class members receiving checks worth approximately $69.51.

$189.7 Million Judgment (2025): 

In a separate business dispute, Vivint is on the hook for $189.7 million in damages, including a $140 million punitive damages award, to CPI Security after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed its judgment in July 2025.

Taken together, this track record demonstrates that Vivint has repeatedly faced — and paid to resolve — accusations of deceptive and unauthorized consumer outreach.

Legal Context: What Laws Are at Stake, and Why This Case Matters

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) is the primary federal law governing unwanted marketing calls and texts. Enacted in 1991 and enforced by the FCC, the TCPA prohibits companies from:

• Making telemarketing calls to numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry without written consent
• Using autodialing systems or prerecorded messages without prior express consent
• Sending unsolicited commercial text messages

Violations carry statutory damages of $500 per call or text, which can triple to $1,500 per violation if the court finds the violation was willful. In a case involving thousands or millions of contacts, liability can escalate quickly into the tens of millions of dollars.

Website Visitor Tracking is a rapidly growing area of litigation. Across the country, there has been a surge in website privacy claims involving allegations under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) and similar state wiretapping laws, with cases centered on the use of third-party tracking technologies including session replay software, website analytics tools, and web form data capture.

Class action attorneys are extending these tactics with email tracking pixel lawsuits, repurposing privacy statutes to sue companies that use technology capturing browsing data — including chatbots, session replay software, and website traffic analysis tools.

The Vivint case sits squarely in this emerging legal landscape: a company allegedly using its website to harvest consumer information without proper disclosure, then using that data to fuel aggressive marketing campaigns.

What’s the potential exposure?

 If a class is certified and the TCPA violations are proven, each unauthorized call or text represents a minimum $500 statutory penalty. Multiply that by tens of thousands of contacts across a national class, and damages could easily reach eight figures. Prior Vivint TCPA settlements provide a benchmark.

Are You Affected? Here’s What to Do Right Now

You may be a potential class member if:

• You received unsolicited calls, texts, or emails from Vivint or Vivint-affiliated marketers
• Your phone number was on the National Do Not Call Registry when you were contacted
• You visited Vivint’s website or a Vivint-affiliated site (like VivintOffers.com) and subsequently received marketing communications you did not explicitly authorize
• You have no existing relationship with Vivint as a customer

Steps to take now:

• Document everything. Screenshot any texts, save emails, and log call times/dates from Vivint or any company calling on Vivint’s behalf
• Check your Do Not Call Registry status at donotcall.gov
• File a complaint with the FCC (fcc.gov/consumers/guides/stop-unwanted-calls-and-texts) or FTC (reportfraud.ftc.gov)
• Consult a consumer protection attorney if you believe you have a viable individual or class claim
• Monitor the case on PACER at Case No. 2:24-cv-01572 for updates on class certification and any settlement discussions

Note: You do not need to take action to join a class action simply because it has been filed. If a class is certified and a settlement or judgment is reached, class members typically receive notice by mail or email.

Current Status and What Happens Next

The case is in active litigation. The next likely procedural steps include:

Motion to Dismiss: Vivint is expected to challenge the complaint’s legal sufficiency. The court will decide whether the plaintiff has stated a plausible TCPA claim and whether the tracking allegations satisfy legal requirements for privacy claims.

Class Certification: If the case survives early motions, plaintiff’s attorneys will seek to certify a class. This is a critical milestone — a certified class dramatically expands both potential liability and the pressure to settle.

Discovery: Both sides will exchange evidence including Vivint’s marketing databases, call and email logs, website analytics data, and records of how consumer information was obtained and used.

Settlement Negotiations: Given Vivint’s history of settling privacy-related class actions, a negotiated resolution remains a realistic possibility at any stage of the proceedings.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Vivint class action lawsuit about? 

The lawsuit alleges that Vivint Smart Home sent unsolicited marketing calls, texts, and emails to consumers in violation of federal law — and that the company’s website tracked visitors and captured their personal information without proper disclosure or valid consent.

Who can join the Vivint spam emails class action?

 The lawsuit looks to represent anyone in the United States who, at any time in the past four years, received two or more telemarketing calls or texts within any 12-month period from Vivint at least 31 days after listing their phone number on the National Do Not Call Registry. Those who received unsolicited emails or were tracked on Vivint’s website without consent may also have claims.

How much money could class members receive? 

Under the TCPA, each unlawful call or text carries statutory damages of $500, rising to $1,500 per violation if found willful. Individual payouts in prior Vivint TCPA settlements have ranged from approximately $69 to several hundred dollars per claimant, depending on the total class size and settlement amount.

Has there been a settlement yet? 

No settlement has been announced in this case. It remains in active litigation as of April 2026.

What is Vivint’s legal track record on these issues? 

Vivint has previously agreed to a $9.75 million settlement over FCRA violations and a $20 million FTC settlement over credit report misuse. An earlier TCPA case also resulted in a settlement. This pattern of prior resolutions may influence how aggressively both sides litigate the current case.

Do I need to do anything right now to be part of the class?

 Not yet. At this stage, no class has been certified and no claim process is open. If the case progresses to a settlement or judgment, affected consumers will receive formal notification. Document any Vivint contacts you received and consult an attorney if you believe your rights were violated.

Last Updated: April 17, 2026

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Allegations in a complaint are not findings of fact. All parties are presumed innocent unless and until proven otherwise in court.