I Joined Every Class Action Lawsuit I Could Find, and So Can You

In early April of this year, a small but welcome deposit landed in my digital wallet. It wasn't a gift, nor was it payment for a service rendered in the traditional sense. It was $40.67, my portion of a $90-million settlement stemming from the "Facebook Internet Tracking Litigation." This wasn't the first, and it certainly won't be the last. Since the beginning of the year, similar, albeit smaller, sums have arrived: $21.65, $20.04 (twice), $14.81, and $12.60. Each payment represents a successful claim filed in various class action lawsuits.

For many, the phrase "class action lawsuit" conjures images of complex legal battles, late-night lawyer commercials, or perhaps a vague awareness of a large company being sued. What often goes unnoticed is the potential for ordinary individuals, like you and me, to be directly impacted – and potentially compensated – when these cases settle. We are, often unknowingly, part of an expansive universe of litigation, and billions of dollars are involved.

Recent data underscores the sheer scale of this activity. According to a report from a defense attorney interest group, class action settlements in the past year alone totaled a staggering $42 billion. While slightly less than the peaks of $51.4 billion in 2023 and $66 billion in 2022, this figure still represents the third-highest value recorded in the last two decades. This trend is likely to continue, fueled by the increasing proliferation of corporate monopolies, particularly within the tech sector. As companies grow larger and their reach expands, so too does the potential pool of affected individuals when alleged misconduct occurs. Lawsuits against tech giants concerning privacy, data handling, and market practices are becoming more common, involving millions of potential claimants and leading to substantial settlement funds.

The digital age has also transformed how potential class members are notified. A change in federal rules in 2018 solidified email as a primary method for delivering class action notices. This means that right now, an email buried in your spam folder could be your official notification that you are eligible for a payout. The process for claiming has also become remarkably streamlined. Often, it involves little more than opening the email, clicking a link, entering a unique class member code, and providing details about your eligibility. While some settlements require proof of purchase or harm (like receipts), many are "no-proof" settlements, requiring only an attestation that you were affected. Once the claim is filed, you select your preferred payment method – Venmo, Zelle, prepaid cards, paper checks, direct deposit – and wait. After months, or sometimes years, the payout arrives.

Despite the convenience, a striking paradox exists: the vast majority of eligible claimants never receive a penny. A 2019 study by the Federal Trade Commission revealed an alarmingly low claims rate, averaging just 4 percent across class actions. This means that for every 100 people entitled to compensation, only four actually claim it.

Consider the scale of missed opportunities. The 2018 Cambridge Analytica scandal, for instance, affected an estimated 250 million US Facebook users – essentially everyone with an account at the time. Despite this massive eligible class size, only 17 million valid claims were filed. That leaves over 230 million people who were potentially entitled to a share of the settlement but didn't claim it. More recent cases, such as those related to social media addiction (ironically advertised on platforms like Instagram to find claimants), the settlement with Juul over targeting teens, or the recent Lopez v. Apple Inc. Siri settlement (offering $20 per eligible device), highlight ongoing opportunities that many will miss simply by not paying attention.

Why do so many people leave money on the table? Common reasons include skepticism (assuming the notice is a scam), the perceived hassle of filing a claim for a potentially small payout, or simply overlooking notices buried in overflowing inboxes or spam folders. But for a dedicated few, these notices represent an opportunity. People like April Phelps are actively seeking out and filing claims with enthusiasm.

The Dedicated Claim Hunters

April Phelps, a healthcare worker based in Memphis, is one such individual. She estimates she has received nearly $8,000 since 2023 by diligently tracking class action notices. "I check daily," Phelps says, describing her routine. "Out of a seven-day week, no more than about two and a half hours—probably 30 minutes or so a day—just to scroll through and see if there's been any updates or any new settlements that impact me. I'll check my junk mail too, just to make sure."

Phelps' dedication is not unique. She is part of a growing community of individuals who actively seek out these opportunities. I connected with Phelps through a Facebook group associated with Top Class Actions, a website that serves as a hub for information on ongoing class action lawsuits and settlements. The TCA Settlements & Payouts Facebook group, boasting over 30,000 members, is a testament to the collective interest in this space. Members share information, help newcomers understand eligibility requirements, provide updates on payment timelines, and celebrate successful payouts by posting pictures of their Venmo, Zelle, or check receipts.

For me, this journey into the world of class action claims began somewhat serendipitously. My first involvement dates back to 2016, related to the Aliso Canyon gas leak, which WIRED reported as the "worst climate disaster in US history" at the time. That process was lengthy, involving emails and phone calls, and the payout took seven years to materialize. But the experience planted a seed. I started searching my email archives for the word "settlement," curious about other cases I might have been a part of without realizing it.

This led me to a series of discoveries. In 2021, I found Mansour v. Bumble Trading Inc., a California settlement alleging discrimination against male users due to the platform's women-message-first policy. I filed a claim and waited. Then came Rivera et al. v. Google LLC, concerning Google Photos' collection of face data without consent. Next was Sosa v. Onfido, another biometric privacy violation case. I also found claims related to alleged manipulation of gas prices (California v. Vitol) and even misleading labels on food products (Milan v. Clif Bar & Co.). And, of course, the Facebook Internet Tracking Litigation that recently paid out.

My motivation isn't rooted in a deep-seated animosity towards these companies. I still occasionally eat Clif Bars. The driving force is simpler: if the law determines that I, as a consumer or user, was harmed and am owed compensation, why wouldn't I claim it? These companies, often vast and profitable, are being held accountable for alleged wrongdoing, even if they don't formally admit fault in the settlement. Receiving a payout, however small, feels like a minor victory in a system that can often feel stacked against the individual.

Phelps echoes this sentiment. Her active pursuit of claims began in 2021 after discovering, via a junk mail notice, that she was eligible for a payout from litigation against Blue Cross Blue Shield. She sees it as a matter of awareness and empowerment. "More people need to start paying attention," she urges, "because if you miss a deadline, in some cases, for a $10,000 cheque, you're going to be upset. I wish I was getting $10,000, but some people are eligible to receive that, and they don't take it seriously because they don't do their research."

For Phelps, the Facebook groups and online communities dedicated to class actions have been invaluable resources. They provide a space for people to ask questions, share filing tips, and verify the legitimacy of notices. This community aspect helps demystify the process and encourages participation. Phelps has even evangelized friends and family members, including her mother, into becoming more conscious of potential claims.

"It's not like these are poor defenseless companies, right? They committed an error," Phelps states. She believes that increased participation in claiming settlements could serve as a stronger deterrent. "If more people pay attention, honestly, I feel like these manufacturers or these businesses will stop being so quick to offer things to us without doing their research."

The Information Void and Third-Party Players

While online communities and websites like Top Class Actions and ClassAction.org fill a crucial gap, they are not a perfect solution. Amanda M. Rose, a professor of law at Vanderbilt University, points out that relying on third-party aggregators highlights a systemic issue: the lack of a centralized, official government resource for class action information.

"There's been a lot of enthusiasm for technology solving these problems, although we see ... that it hasn't necessarily borne itself out," Rose notes. She argues that a federally run website and support system, perhaps something akin to a ClassAction.gov, could significantly improve claim rates, reduce confusion among potential claimants, and create a valuable public database for researchers studying the effectiveness and impact of class actions.

Without such official infrastructure, the space is occupied by private companies, some operating with questionable practices. Rose mentions entities like "ClaimClam," which was called out by the DC attorney general. ClaimClam reportedly used AI to identify potential class members and encouraged them to file claims through their platform, taking a cut of the settlement (sometimes as high as 15% or even 40%). According to a settlement document between ClaimClam and the DC attorney general's office, the company also allegedly misled consumers into believing settlements were guaranteed and hid its affiliation with a law firm co-owned by the same founder. Even reputable aggregator sites, while providing valuable information, are private entities that may receive referral fees from law firms, creating a potential, albeit often disclosed, conflict of interest.

The absence of a federal database also complicates practical matters for settlement administrators – the entities tasked with identifying and notifying eligible class members. Tracking down individuals who have moved, ensuring the complex legal language of notices is translated into easily understandable plain English, and confirming that emails bypass spam filters are ongoing challenges. Rose highlights that there is a significant lack of comprehensive data on how effectively these administrators perform their duties. "You can't even have an intelligent public policy debate about these matters without having better insight into them," she argues.

The Purpose and Evolution of Class Actions

This discussion about the mechanics and challenges of class actions touches upon their fundamental purpose within the American legal system. Deborah Hensler, a professor of dispute resolution at Stanford Law School, explains that a core pillar supporting class actions is their function as a form of public service and a deterrent against corporate misconduct.

"At least in our legal culture, we have decided that we should make it possible for people with small value claims to bring them all together," Hensler states. She illustrates this with a simple example: a corporation might profit significantly by collecting small amounts, say $25 each, from a large number of customers through a questionable practice. Individually, pursuing a lawsuit for $25 is economically unfeasible for a consumer. "But individually, going to court for $25? Forget it," Hensler says. Class actions provide a mechanism to aggregate these small, individual claims into a single, larger case that is financially viable for lawyers to pursue and impactful enough to deter the defendant company from continuing the harmful practice.

Class actions, in various forms, have a long history in US law. Hensler points to a dispute in 1820, West v. Randall, concerning a deceased general's estate, as widely considered the first instance. Perhaps the most famous example, however, is Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the landmark Supreme Court case that declared state-sponsored segregation in public schools unconstitutional. While not a typical consumer class action seeking monetary damages, it fundamentally operated on the principle of representing a large class of individuals (Black schoolchildren) who had suffered a common harm (segregation) and seeking a systemic remedy on their behalf.

Hensler attributes the prevalence of class actions in the US, compared to many other countries, to specific features of the American legal system. These include relatively low court filing fees, the ability for lawyers to advertise their services, and the widespread practice of contingency fee arrangements, where lawyers are paid a percentage of the settlement or award only if they win the case. Contingency fees make legal representation accessible to individuals who cannot afford upfront legal costs.

"When you have a system that is so law-oriented, and you have a lot of lawyers and you have a way for people to find lawyers, even if they don't have very much money, then you have a way for lawyers to make money by taking people's cases," Hensler explains. This environment encourages lawyers to identify instances of widespread harm and explore the possibility of bringing a class action, such as cases involving Facebook privacy violations or other large-scale corporate issues.

Beyond consumer and privacy cases, class actions have also been used as powerful tools in litigation with significant political and social implications. Hensler mentions cases like J.G.G. v. Trump, where a judge ordered the return of Venezuelan men on deportation flights, an order the Trump administration reportedly ignored. "The current cases are on behalf of people who are claiming they have been improperly, illegally treated by the Trump Administration," Hensler says. "They're trying to get the courts to say 'Stop doing this,' not just for one person, but for all the people like them." This highlights the dual nature of class actions: they can seek monetary compensation for past harm and injunctive relief to prevent future harm for a large group.

Challenges and the Shifting Landscape of Mass Claims

Despite their historical significance and ongoing utility, class actions have faced challenges. The Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), signed into law in 2005, aimed to curb perceived abuses of the class action system. A key provision made it easier for defendants to transfer class action cases from state courts to federal courts. While intended to prevent plaintiffs' lawyers from seeking favorable venues in state courts, this shift often made class actions harder to certify, prolonged the litigation process, and increased costs for plaintiffs.

In response to these hurdles, plaintiffs' lawyers have increasingly turned to alternative strategies for handling large numbers of claims. These include mass torts, mass-claim litigation, and multidistrict litigation (MDL). Unlike traditional class actions, which seek to certify a single class of plaintiffs with identical claims, these approaches involve coordinating large numbers of individual lawsuits that share common legal or factual issues. For instance, MDLs consolidate similar cases filed in different federal districts before a single judge for pretrial proceedings, streamlining discovery and other preliminary matters. If not settled, cases may be sent back to their original courts for trial, although often, bellwether trials are conducted, or global settlements are negotiated.

In the pre-internet era, coordinating thousands or even millions of individual claimants for mass torts or MDLs would have been a logistical nightmare, a "Sisyphean" task as described in the source article. However, in 2025, digital communication, online databases, and sophisticated case management software have made this coordination significantly more feasible, almost "smooth sailing" by comparison. This technological shift has facilitated the rise of these alternative mass claim procedures.

"The underlying issue is that modern society produces mass injuries, mass complaints, mass everything," Hensler observes. Whether it's a defective product sold to millions, a data breach affecting an entire user base, or a widespread environmental issue, the potential for large numbers of people to suffer similar harm is inherent in a globalized, interconnected world. "We've done a pretty good job in this country of trying to come up with procedures for dealing with this 'mass claim' phenomenon—a better job than virtually every other country in the world—but we haven't figured it out yet." The legal system is constantly adapting to the scale and nature of modern disputes.

Finding Your Share: Practical Steps

Regardless of the specific legal mechanism – be it a certified class action, a mass tort, or an MDL – the reality for the individual is that notices about potential claims are likely to continue arriving. For people like April Phelps and myself, this means maintaining vigilance. We keep scanning social media, checking our email inboxes, and crucially, looking through our spam folders, where many official notices end up.

So, how can you increase your chances of receiving a payout you might be entitled to? Here are some practical steps:

• Check Your Email Regularly, Including Spam: Make it a habit to quickly scan your spam or junk folders. Search for terms like "settlement," "class action," "notice," or the names of companies you've done business with.
• Don't Dismiss Notices as Scams: While scams exist, legitimate class action notices are often sent via email or mail. If you receive one, take a moment to verify its legitimacy. Look for official court names, case numbers, and contact information for the settlement administrator. A quick web search for the case name can often confirm if it's real.
• Visit Reputable Aggregator Websites: Sites like Top Class Actions and ClassAction.org track ongoing settlements and provide details on eligibility and how to file a claim. They often list settlements that don't require proof of purchase, making it easier to file.
• Join Online Communities: Facebook groups like TCA Settlements & Payouts can be valuable resources for learning about new cases, getting help with the filing process, and seeing proof of payouts from other members.
• Understand Eligibility Requirements: Each settlement has specific criteria for who is included in the class. Read the notice carefully or check the settlement website to ensure you qualify based on factors like residency, dates of purchase or use, or specific experiences with the product or service.
• Keep Records (If Applicable): For settlements requiring proof, having old receipts, purchase confirmations, or records of service usage can be crucial. Even if a settlement is "no-proof," being able to reference dates or details can help you confirm eligibility.
• File Before the Deadline: Settlement claims have strict deadlines. Do not procrastinate once you identify a case you're eligible for.
• Choose Your Payment Method Wisely: Consider the options offered (Venmo, Zelle, direct deposit, check, prepaid card) and choose the one most convenient for you. Digital payments often arrive faster than checks.

It's important to manage expectations. Payouts can range from a few dollars to potentially hundreds or even thousands, depending on the settlement size, the number of claimants, and the nature of the claim. The process can also take a long time, often years, from the initial lawsuit filing to the final distribution of funds after all appeals and legal processes are complete.

However, the potential rewards, both financial and perhaps even psychological, make the effort worthwhile for many. As Phelps noted, these companies are not "poor defenseless." If they are found to have engaged in practices that harmed consumers, receiving compensation is a form of accountability. It's a way for individuals to reclaim a small piece of the value that might have been extracted from them, whether through unfair fees, privacy violations, or misleading marketing.

The system isn't perfect. The low claim rate means that billions of dollars intended for consumers ultimately go unclaimed or are sometimes distributed in alternative ways (like cy pres awards to charities, though this is controversial). The reliance on private administrators and the lack of a central government portal create inefficiencies and opportunities for less scrupulous actors. The legal landscape is constantly shifting, with mass torts and MDLs becoming more prominent as traditional class actions face challenges under laws like CAFA.

But until a more equitable or efficient system emerges, the current framework offers a path for individuals to recover something when corporate actions cause widespread harm. It's not always about achieving perfect justice, which is often slow, complex, and expensive. Instead, it's about navigating the existing system to ensure you receive what you are legally entitled to.

My experience, and that of others like April Phelps, demonstrates that with a little awareness and effort, you can tap into this often-overlooked source of funds. Scanning emails, checking reputable websites, and engaging with online communities can uncover opportunities you didn't know existed. Maybe in a couple more years, I'll get another notification about forty bucks, or perhaps more. And until then, I'll keep scrolling, filing, and quietly cashing in. Because if corporations can profit off our data, habits, and mistakes, the least we can do is get paid back when they screw up. Don't leave free money on the table – you shouldn't either.