The ATM surcharge Visa Mastercard settlement is a major class action resolution addressing allegations that Visa Inc. and Mastercard Incorporated colluded with major banks to fix and inflate automated teller machine (ATM) surcharges, forcing consumers and businesses to pay higher fees when using ATMs outside their bank’s network. The settlement resolves over a decade of antitrust litigation claiming that the defendants unlawfully restrained competition in the ATM fee market.
Background of the ATM Surcharge Visa Mastercard Settlement
This class action lawsuit, originating in 2011 and litigated in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, accused Visa, Mastercard, and participating banks, including JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America, of conspiring to set minimum ATM surcharge fees in violation of federal antitrust laws. The alleged scheme prevented ATM operators from competing by charging lower access fees, thereby artificially maintaining high surcharge rates for millions of consumers across the United States.
The litigation included multiple appeals and class certifications, ultimately culminating in settlements totaling approximately $264.2 million, with $197.5 million allocated to Visa and Mastercard and previous settlements of $66.74 million with the bank defendants.
Terms and Compensation of the Settlement
- Settlement Fund: Visa and Mastercard agreed to pay a combined $197.5 million — $104.675 million from Visa and $92.825 million from Mastercard — into a non-reversionary settlement fund allocated for claimants, attorney fees, and administrative costs.
- Eligible Class Members: Individuals and entities who paid unreimbursed ATM surcharges on foreign ATM transactions at U.S. financial institution-issued ATM cards from October 1, 2007, through the preliminary approval date.
- Payment Structure: Payments are distributed on a pro rata basis from the net settlement fund after deductions. Members who previously filed claims and received payments from earlier settlements are automatically eligible for additional payments based on the new settlement.
- Claim Submission Deadline: All claims must be filed by January 22, 2025, either online or by mail. Late claims are generally not accepted.
- Opt-Out and Objection Rights: Class members may exclude themselves by November 22, 2024, to retain individual legal claims or may object to the settlement by the same deadline.
Legal Framework Behind the Settlement
The lawsuit was based on violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, alleging that the agreements between Visa, Mastercard, and banks constituted illegal price-fixing and restrained trade by preventing competition in ATM network fees. The case sought injunctive relief to prevent further collusion and monetary damages to refund consumers overcharged due to the conspiracy.
Impact of the Settlement
- Consumers and Businesses: Millions affected by inflated ATM surcharge fees may receive partial refunds, estimated to recover approximately 23-38% of the surcharges paid.
- Banking and Payment Industry: The settlement pressures participants to revisit fee-structuring practices and promotes greater competition and transparency in ATM access charges.
- Legal Precedent: Affirms that payment networks and banks are subject to antitrust scrutiny regarding fee-setting and market competition.
Claims Process and Consumer Guidance
Class members can file claims through the dedicated settlement website atmclassaction.com or request paper forms from the claims administrator. Claim forms require an oath that the claimant incurred ATM surcharges during the class period.
Claimants who previously submitted valid claims and received payments do not need to submit new claims unless they wish to claim additional transactions after their prior submissions.
Claimants can also opt out of the settlement to preserve individual legal rights or object to the settlement’s fairness by submitting written statements to the court by the deadlines.
Conclusion
The ATM surcharge Visa Mastercard settlement resolves long-standing allegations of unlawful fee-fixing in the ATM market, providing monetary compensation to consumers and businesses impacted by artificially high charges for ATM access. With total settlements surpassing $264 million including bank defendants, this case underscores the importance of competitive practices in financial services and offers affected individuals an opportunity to recover part of the fees paid.
Class members should file timely claims and use official resources to ensure receipt of compensation from this significant antitrust settlement.
