Skip to Content

AI Insurance Company Faces Class Action for Use of Biometric Data

After a tweeting mishap, Lemonade Inc., an AI-based insurance company, faces a class action for allegedly violating New York laws against the use of biometric data without consent by using facial recognition technology to analyze videos submitted in the claims process.

Artificial intelligence and big data are key parts of Lemonade’s appeal to consumers and investors, but those same tools provoked concern on social media when Lemonade mentioned its use of facial recognition to analyze videos. In a series of now-deleted tweets, Lemonade stated that it gathers more than 1,600 “data points” about its customers, which is “100x more data than traditional insurance carriers,” to be analyzed by a “charming artificial intelligence bot” that then crafts and quotes insurance. The data points include videos made and submitted by customers. Lemonade’s AI bot analyzes the videos for fraud and supposedly can detect “non-verbal cues” that traditional insurers cannot. According to the class action complaint, Lemonade also tweeted that this process “ultimately helps … lower [its] loss ratios” and its “overall operating costs.”

These tweets raised concerns with Twitter users regarding the collection of facial biometric data, including the possibility for discrimination based on race and other traits. In response, Lemonade tweeted that it did not use and is not “trying to build AI that uses physical or personal features to deny claims.” Rather, Lemonade explained that it asks for a video during the claims process because “it’s better for [its] customers” and that the “term non-verbal cues was a bad choice of words to describe the facial recognition technology [it] us[es] to flag claims submitted by the same person under different identities.”

In August 2021, plaintiff Mark Pruden filed a putative class action in the Southern District of New York alleging that Lemonade violated New York statutory and common law by “collecting, storing, analyzing, or otherwise using biometric data of thousands of its customers without their authorization or consent,” and contrary to its privacy policy. The claims include violation of New York’s Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, breach of contract, breach of implied contract, and unjust enrichment.

As of December 2021, the case is stayed while the parties explore settlement negotiations.

Biometric data continues to be a hot topic among consumers, regulators, and plaintiffs’ lawyers, especially amid growing concern by consumers about how and why their biometric data is collected. Companies should be careful to make clear what they do, obtain unambiguous consent from their customers, and take caution when posting on social media.

©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.