In 2025, a long-running class action lawsuit concerning inflated ATM fees was resolved with a $197.5 million settlement approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. This landmark antitrust case accused major payment networks Visa and Mastercard, along with some large banks, of colluding to artificially fix ATM surcharges and restrict competition in ways that led to consumers and ATM operators paying excessive fees for years. Here is a comprehensive overview of the case, its background, legal claims, settlement details, eligibility and claim process, and broader ramifications for consumers and the financial industry.
ATM Class Action Lawsuit: Background and Core Allegations
What Was the Lawsuit About?
The lawsuit, initially filed in 2011 by the National ATM Council and several independent ATM operators, alleged that Visa and Mastercard, along with banks such as Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo, violated federal antitrust laws. The defendants were accused of establishing uniform agreements that artificially set minimum ATM access fees and surcharge limits, preventing ATM operators from competing by lowering fees. The complaint argued these policies kept ATM usage costs higher than they would have been in a competitive market.
- The agreements barred ATM owners from surcharging below the levels set by Visa and Mastercard’s networks, restricting price competition.
- Consumers were forced to pay inflated surcharges at ATMs nationwide, with no alternatives offering lower fees.
- ATM operators were similarly harmed, incurring artificially high network fees and limited ability to pass on savings to customers.
Timeline and Legal Journey
- 2011: Lawsuit filed accusing Visa, Mastercard, and major banks of colluding on ATM fee restrictions.
- 2018-2023: Multiple class certifications were upheld, appeals were denied, and the case expanded to include consumer claims in addition to ATM operator claims.
- August 2022: Courts approved a $66.74 million settlement with Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo resolving part of the claims.
- April 2024: The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by Visa and Mastercard on class certification decisions, clearing the way for final settlement approvals.
- June 2025: Final court approval was granted for the $197.5 million settlement with Visa and Mastercard, concluding years of litigation.
Settlement Details and How to Claim
Who Is Eligible?
The settlement covers consumers and ATM operators who paid ATM surcharges or access fees in the United States between October 1, 2007, and July 26, 2024. This includes fees paid at bank-operated and independent ATMs linked to Visa and Mastercard networks.
Settlement Amount and Distribution
- The total settlement amount is $197.5 million, after previous settlements with the major banks brought combined total recoveries to over $264 million.
- Funds will be distributed after deducting attorneys’ fees, administrative costs, and incentive awards for class representatives.
- Claim payments depend on the number of validated claims and the amount each claimant paid in unreimbursed ATM fees during the eligible period.
Claim Process and Deadlines
- Claimants must submit a valid claim form, affirming under oath that they were assessed ATM surcharges during the relevant time frame.
- Those who previously filed claims in earlier bank settlements were automatically included but may need to update claims if they paid additional fees after prior submissions.
- The deadline for filing new or updated claims was January 22, 2025.
- Class members had until November 22, 2024, to opt out of the settlement if they wished to preserve their right to sue independently.
- More information and claim forms were available at atmclassaction.com.
Broader Implications of the ATM Lawsuit
Impact on Consumers and ATM Users
- The lawsuit highlights the impact of anti-competitive practices on everyday consumers who rely on ATMs for cash access and have been charged inflated fees for over a decade.
- Approved settlements provide monetary relief and bring awareness about hidden costs in electronic payment networks and ATM pricing policies.
Significance for the Banking and Payment Industry
- The case underscores the regulatory and legal risks companies face when engaging in fee-setting agreements that restrict competition, triggering antitrust concerns.
- Visa, Mastercard, and banks may face increased scrutiny and be incentivized to allow more competitive, transparent pricing models for ATM services.
- The litigation serves as a precedent for how courts view fee-setting arrangements within large financial networks.
Lessons for Class Action Litigation
- These multi-year proceedings highlight the complexities of prosecuting antitrust class actions involving large financial institutions and the importance of class certification.
- Consolidated settlements combining claims from operators and consumers can maximize recovery and help resolve extensive litigation.
- Effective settlement communication and claims administration are critical to ensuring eligible participants receive compensation.
Frequently Asked Questions About the ATM Class Action Lawsuit
What is the basis of the ATM lawsuit?
Plaintiffs argued that Visa, Mastercard, and major banks illegally coordinated to restrict ATM surcharges, forcing higher fees on consumers and limiting price competition.
Who can claim compensation?
Consumers and independent ATM operators who paid ATM surcharges or unreimbursed fees between October 1, 2007, and July 26, 2024, are eligible to file claims.
Has the settlement been finalized?
Yes, the settlement was granted final approval by the U.S. District Court in June 2025.
Where can I submit or check claims?
Visit atmclassaction.com for claim forms, updates, and instructions.
Did Visa and Mastercard admit wrongdoing?
No. Both companies denied the allegations but agreed to settle to avoid prolonged litigation.
Conclusion
The ATM class action lawsuit and resulting $197.5 million settlement resolve years of complex litigation over alleged anticompetitive practices that increased ATM fees nationwide. The case benefits millions of consumers and operators by providing financial restitution and sets an important precedent promoting fair competition in electronic payment networks. Going forward, the lawsuit highlights the need for transparency and consumer protection in fee structures and opens the door for ongoing scrutiny of large financial service providers’ market behaviors.
