FirstAlerts
Regulators & Courts

FTC Distributing $23.8 Million to Grubhub Drivers and Customers Under Settlement

Payments to 640,038 consumers stem from a December 2024 lawsuit by the FTC and the Illinois Attorney General over driver-earnings claims, account restrictions and restaurant listings.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 12, 2026, 8:18 p.m. ET
Developing

This matter is open. Agencies announce the actions they bring far more reliably than the ones they lose, so an action reported here may since have been settled, dismissed or decided without a further announcement.

More on this incident

The Federal Trade Commission is distributing $23.8 million to 640,038 consumers, including Grubhub drivers and customers, according to TechCrunch. The payments stem from a lawsuit that the FTC and the Illinois Attorney General filed against the food delivery company in federal district court in December 2024. The complaint accused Grubhub of making misleading claims about how much drivers could earn, of restricting customers' access to their accounts and money, and of listing restaurants on its platform without permission, TechCrunch reported. The complaint alleged that Grubhub had as many as 325,000 unaffiliated restaurants listed in order to make its platform appear larger, and that the company sometimes refused to remove restaurants that asked to be taken off, instead allegedly trying to convince some of them to enter paid partnerships. The matter was resolved by , according to TechCrunch, with the settlement also requiring Grubhub to change its practices around advertising driver earnings, account restrictions and restaurant listings. The allegations in the complaint are allegations; no further findings beyond the resolution are described in the available record. The distribution is ongoing and this account is based on a single report. Further details, including any statement from Grubhub, are not available in the facts on hand.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 314 Aug 2026, 06:51current

    Added Yahoo Finance reporting on payment method (mailed check and PayPal) and its account of the required practice changes, including restaurant consent before listing.

  2. Version 213 Aug 2026, 12:58

    Added JD Journal reporting on the $25 million payment, the mostly suspended $140 million judgment, and the broader fee-disclosure, subscription-cancellation and driver-earnings allegations.

  3. Version 113 Aug 2026, 00:59current

    First published.

  4. Version 113 Aug 2026, 00:18current

    First published.

  5. Version 113 Aug 2026, 00:25

    First published.

  6. Version 113 Aug 2026, 00:59current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.