Published
July 16, 2026
Settlement administrators are the companies that mail your class action notices and cut your checks — and after a federal investigation-turned-MDL over alleged payment-card kickbacks, judges and lawmakers are rewriting what these firms must disclose about fees, interest, and unclaimed money.
What a Settlement Administrator Actually Does
A settlement administrator is the court-approved, nominally neutral company that runs the mechanics of a settlement: building the class member list, mailing and emailing notices, operating the settlement website, processing and auditing claim forms, and distributing payments by paper check or digital methods like PayPal, Venmo, Zelle, and prepaid cards. The administrator's fees are typically paid out of the settlement fund itself — meaning every dollar of administration cost is a dollar that does not reach class members.For decades, that arrangement ran mostly on trust. Courts approved administration budgets as line items, fee schedules stayed private, and once checks went out, few judges ever asked how many were actually cashed. Because so little proof of operational integrity was required, it was genuinely hard for a court to tell a rigorously run administration from one carrying quiet side revenue.
Why the Scrutiny Intensified: Kickback Allegations and a New MDL
The turning point came in 2025. In May of that year, Forbes published an investigation into the business models of the large, mostly private equity-owned claims administration firms. The reporting described industry allegations that some administrators quietly took a share of the interest income earned while settlement funds sat in bank accounts awaiting distribution, and that financial technology vendors had paid administrators for routing class member payments through their prepaid digital card platforms.Around the same time, proposed class action lawsuits were filed making those claims formally. The complaints allege that three digital payment card providers — Tremendous LLC, Blackhawk Network Holdings, Inc., and Digital Settlement Technologies LLC — induced claims administrators to use their platforms by sharing a portion of the "breakage": the value left over when class members never redeem their digital cards or gift cards. The suits further allege that some administrators concealed these arrangements from courts, counsel, and class members, in some instances through special-purpose entities. In December 2025, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized these actions — naming major administrators including Epiq Systems and Angeion Group among the defendants — as MDL No. 3162, In re: Class Action Settlement Administration Litigation, before Judge John D. Bates in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The consolidated complaints frame the alleged scheme as a violation of racketeering and antitrust laws.
It is important to be precise here: these are allegations in pending litigation. No court has found any administrator or payment vendor liable, and the defendants are contesting the claims. But the litigation has already reshaped industry behavior, because the underlying incentive problem it describes is easy for any judge to grasp — if a vendor earns more when class members fail to collect their money, the vendor's interests point in exactly the wrong direction.
Congress noticed too. In June 2025, Senator Chuck Grassley wrote to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and the Judicial Conference about reports that claims administrators had received payments from fintech companies for distributing settlement payouts through prepaid digital cards, pressing the federal judiciary on how it oversees these court-approved vendors. If you have ever received a settlement payment on a prepaid digital card and had trouble redeeming it, our earlier post on a Blackhawk prepaid card redemption error covers one real-world example of how those payments can go wrong.
The 9% Problem: Most Class Members Never File
All of this matters because of a stubborn fact about consumer class actions: most eligible people never claim their money. The Federal Trade Commission's 2019 staff report, Consumers and Class Actions — still the most comprehensive public study of the question — examined 149 consumer class action settlements and found a median claims rate of about 9%, with a weighted mean closer to 4%. Notice method made a measurable difference: mailed notice packets that included a claim form produced claims rates around 10%, postcards about 6%, and email notice roughly 3%.When 90% or more of a class goes unpaid, the fate of the unclaimed remainder becomes the real story of the settlement. Depending on the agreement, leftover funds may be redistributed to claimants in a second round, donated to charity under the cy pres doctrine, escheated to state unclaimed property funds, or — in reversionary deals — returned to the defendant. The kickback lawsuits add a darker alleged possibility to that list: value quietly captured by the vendors in the payment chain. That is why courts increasingly want a granular audit trail for the unreached, not just a single participation percentage — which notices bounced, what remediation was attempted, how many checks were never cashed, and where every residual dollar went.
What Courts Now Expect From a Settlement Distribution
The legal foundation for this shift predates the scandal. The December 2018 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2) require courts, before approving any class settlement, to weigh "the effectiveness of any proposed method of distributing relief to the class, including the method of processing class-member claims." The advisory committee notes go further, suggesting that in some cases courts should defer part of the attorneys' fee award until the actual claims rate and distribution results are known — directly tying lawyer compensation to how much money really reaches the class.Some courts have built infrastructure around that principle. The Northern District of California's Procedural Guidance for Class Action Settlements asks parties to file a post-distribution accounting covering the claims rate, the amounts actually paid to class members, the number of checks that went uncashed, and how leftover funds were handled — and it remains, notably, the exception rather than the norm among the 94 federal districts. The same district produced one of the earliest high-profile examples of settlement-economics scrutiny: in the $115 million Anthem data breach settlement, the court appointed a special master to review class counsel's billing and ultimately awarded roughly $31 million in fees rather than the $38 million requested. And in the long-running Broiler Chicken antitrust litigation in the Northern District of Illinois, the court in 2024 held a hearing over a previously undisclosed fee agreement involving class counsel — another marker that undisclosed financial arrangements around settlements, whoever holds them, now draw judicial attention.
Put together, the direction of travel is clear. What used to be acceptable — private flat-rate fee quotes, vendors chosen for the administrator's convenience, claims rates treated as trivia, accounting delivered months after checks expired — is giving way to a different standard: disclosure of every revenue stream in the administration chain, vendor choices documented around class member accessibility, claims rates treated as evidence of whether the settlement worked, and ledgers that can be produced when the judge asks, not quarters later.
The Clay Platte Agreement: A Template for No-Kickback Administration
The clearest picture of the new benchmarks comes from a small case with outsized significance. In a roughly $1 million data breach settlement involving Clay Platte Family Medicine, a Kansas City-area medical practice, U.S. District Judge Stephen R. Bough of the Western District of Missouri ordered public disclosure of the administrator's fees, including any rebates or other financial rewards. In May 2026, as Forbes reported, Angeion Group agreed on the record to a set of conditions that reads like a blueprint for conflict-free administration:• The administrator will not receive any rebates, awards, credits, or financial compensation from any vendor, subcontractor, or bank in connection with the administration.
• The settlement bank will be chosen through competitive bidding from multiple institutions — including at least two banks with which the administrator has no existing commercial relationship — with plaintiffs' counsel selecting based solely on the best interests of the class.
• No prepaid cards will be used to distribute payments. Class members will be paid by paper check or by digital methods that carry no rebate or incentive schemes, such as Venmo and Zelle.
None of this is binding on other cases, and the agreement resolves nothing in the pending MDL. But it appears to be one of the first public examples of a major administrator formally forgoing every category of side revenue the lawsuits complain about — and settlement terms like these have a way of migrating. Once one court has extracted a no-rebates commitment, competitive bank bidding, and public fee disclosure, the next objector or the next judge knows exactly what to ask for.
What This Means When You File a Claim
For class members, the practical upshot of all this scrutiny is mostly good news, and it points to a few habits worth keeping.File the claim, even when the check seems small. Low claims rates are the fuel for every bad incentive described above; every valid claim filed is money that reaches a class member instead of the residual pool. Browse the currently open settlements to see what you may qualify for.
Cash or deposit settlement checks promptly. Settlement checks typically carry void dates — often 90 to 180 days — and an expired check turns your recovery into someone else's accounting question. If a digital payment never arrived, our guide to tracking down a missing settlement payment walks through the usual fixes, and we also cover how long settlement checks normally take to arrive in the first place.
When a settlement offers a choice of payment method, weigh it deliberately. Direct deposit, PayPal, Venmo, Zelle, and paper checks deliver the full face value of your payment. Prepaid digital cards can too — but the pending litigation is a reminder that unredeemed card value has, at least allegedly, been treated as a revenue source, so if you elect a card, redeem it quickly and completely.
Finally, expect to see more of this information in public court files. As post-distribution accountings, fee disclosures, and no-rebate commitments spread, it will get steadily easier to see how much of any settlement actually landed in class members' hands. That transparency is the entire point — and for the administrators that have always run clean distributions, it is the fastest way to prove it.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does a class action settlement administrator do?
A settlement administrator is the court-approved company hired to run the mechanics of a settlement: mailing and emailing notices, running the settlement website, processing claim forms, screening for fraud, and distributing payments by check or digital methods. Administrators are supposed to be neutral — they work for the settlement, not for either side's lawyers.
What percentage of people actually file class action claims?
Far fewer than you might expect. A 2019 Federal Trade Commission staff report that studied 149 consumer class action settlements found a median claims rate of about 9%, with a weighted mean of roughly 4%. Notice method mattered: mailed packets that included a claim form produced claims rates around 10%, postcards about 6%, and email notice about 3%.
Who profits when settlement checks go uncashed?
It depends on the settlement agreement. Leftover money may be redistributed to class members who did claim, sent to a court-approved charity under the cy pres doctrine, escheated to a state unclaimed property fund, or in some reversionary deals returned to the defendant. Lawsuits consolidated in MDL No. 3162 allege that some administrators and digital payment vendors also shared in "breakage" — value left on unredeemed prepaid digital cards — which the defendants have contested and which remains unproven.
What is MDL 3162, the class action settlement administration litigation?
In December 2025, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized several lawsuits against major settlement administrators and digital payment card providers into MDL No. 3162, In re: Class Action Settlement Administration Litigation, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia before Judge John D. Bates. The complaints allege the defendants obtained undisclosed compensation — including shared revenue from unredeemed prepaid digital cards — in connection with court-approved settlement administrations. These are allegations only; nothing has been proven and no liability has been found.
Do settlement administrators keep the interest earned on settlement funds?
Interest earned on a settlement fund generally belongs to the fund itself under the settlement agreement. However, reporting by Forbes in 2025 described allegations that some administrators quietly received a share of interest income or rebates from the banks holding settlement money. In one 2026 data breach case in the Western District of Missouri, the administrator agreed on the record not to accept any rebates, credits, or compensation from any vendor, subcontractor, or bank in that administration, and to select the settlement bank through competitive bidding.
Sources
• Federal Trade Commission, Consumers and Class Actions: A Retrospective and Analysis of Settlement Campaigns (staff report, September 2019)• Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Transfer Order, In re: Class Action Settlement Administration Litigation, MDL No. 3162 (December 12, 2025); MDL 3162 docket on CourtListener
• Forbes, How Private Equity-Owned Companies Quietly Pocket Class Action Payouts (May 21, 2025)
• Forbes, Class Action Claims Administrator Agrees To Stop Taking Vendor Rebates After Kickback Scrutiny (May 29, 2026)
• Senator Chuck Grassley, letter to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and the Judicial Conference on prepaid digital card payments (June 2025)
• Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2) and the 2018 advisory committee notes
• U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, Procedural Guidance for Class Action Settlements
• In re Anthem, Inc. Data Breach Litigation, No. 15-md-02617 (N.D. Cal.) — fee order and special master report (2018)
About This Page
This article summarizes public court records, a Federal Trade Commission staff report, a U.S. Senate letter, and national press reporting about the class action settlement administration industry. The claims described in MDL No. 3162 and related lawsuits are allegations that the defendants are contesting; no court has found any administrator or payment vendor liable, and nothing here asserts otherwise. OpenClassActions.com is a consumer news and information site, not a law firm, a settlement administrator, or a party to any case discussed. This page is general information, not legal advice, and case statuses may have changed after the date shown above.
For more class actions keep scrolling below.
