A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

When shopping online, read the privacy policy

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok

Too often when we’re shopping online, we don’t even think about the seller’s privacy policy. It looks like gobbledygook to most of us and it doesn’t seem particularly important.

However, the privacy policy can have a tremendous impact on your life. If your information is shared illegally, you could be vulnerable to everything from advertising harassment to identity theft and compromised banking information.

Protecting Your Information and Your Finances

Seeking out and reading the privacy policies for online sellers is critical to protect your own identity and your financial safety. Far too many online sellers abuse the trusting indifference of consumers.

Here are some important tips for you as you shop online:

  • California law requires online sellers to provide a clear privacy policy that outlines what information they will share with others, who they will share it with, and under what circumstances they will share this information.
  • Online merchants who do not provide this type of privacy policy should be reported to the appropriate authorities.
  • Some sellers have either inadequate information in their privacy policies or they have no policy at all.
  • It is important to avoid providing more information than is necessary for the purchase. Giving too much information just opens you up to possible privacy violations.

Although local, state and national laws are beginning to clamp down on violations by online sellers, there is still significant danger for consumers. It is critical to watch for privacy policies and protect your personal information.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.