ADT Wireless Home Security Equipment and Monitoring Services

March 2018: A federal judge stayed further consideration of the settlement pending the resolution of a case pending in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, In Re Hyundai & Kia Fuel Econ. Litig., that will resolve related issues.

October 2017: A federal judge granted preliminary approval of the settlement agreement. A final fairness hearing is scheduled for February 1, 2018. For more information, go to https://www.adthomesecuritysettlement.com/.

March 2017: The parties moved for preliminary approval of a settlement agreement. According to the proposed settlement terms, class members may receive either a $15 or $45 cash award depending on when they entered into a contract with ADT. ADT also represented that it changed its disclosures in August 2016 to disclose the risk of hacking.

January 2017: The parties notified the Court that they reached a nationwide settlement agreement, the terms of which have not been disclosed, that would resolve the following related actions:

• Cheatham et al v. ADT Corp. and ADT LLC, Case No. 15-cv-2137, D. AZ.
• Baker v. The ADT Corp. and ADT, LLC dba ADT Security Services, Case No. 15-cv-2038, C. D. IL.
• Edenborough v. ADT, LLC dba ADT Security Services, Inc., Case No. 16-cv-2233, N. D. CA.
• Hernandez v. ADT, LLC dba ADT Security Services, Case No. 50-2016-CA-002944, Florida Circuit Court – 15th Judicial Circuit
• Wilson v. The ADT Corp. and ADT, LLC dba ADT Security Services, Case No. 50-2016-CA-4410, Florida Circuit Court – 15th Judicial Circuit

The parties also requested that the actions be stayed pending approval of the settlement.

March 2016: Two class-action lawsuits were filed against ADT Security Services for allegedly deceptively marketing its home security equipment and monitoring services as being safe and reliable and using innovative and advanced technology when such claims are not true. According to the complaints, ADT’s wireless signals are unencrypted and unauthenticated and, as a result, can be intercepted and interfered with by unauthorized third parties. To read the complaints, click on the case information below.

• Edenborough et al v. ADT, LLC d/b/a ADT Security Services, Inc. and Does 1-50, Case No. 16-cv-2233, N. D. CA.
• Hernandez et al v. The ADT Corporation and ADT LLC d/b/a ADT Security Services, Case No. 16-cv-80335, S. D. FL.

For more information about other class-action lawsuits filed against ADT Security Services and TINA.org’s coverage of the company, click here.