Status
Preliminary Approval Pending
Motion filed December 18, 2025 · no preliminary-approval hearing date set on the docket yet
Settlement Fund
$167,500,000
Visa $88.775M · Mastercard $78.725M
Claim Deadline
Pending
claim form expected ~28 days after preliminary approval · ~180-day claim window
Proof Required
Likely No
prior Mackmin and 2022 bank-ATM settlements were no-proof; final claim-form rules TBD
You may be part of yet another new $167,500,000 class action settlement reached with Visa and Mastercard over
allegations that certain ATM network rules led consumers to pay higher ATM access fees at independent, nonbank
ATMs. This is the third ATM fee class action settlement in a connected series of cases, following the
Settlement Fund
$167,500,000 (proposed) — Visa $88,775,000 · Mastercard $78,725,000
Case Title
Burke v. Visa Inc.
Case Number
No. 1:11-cv-01882 (RJL)
Court
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Judge
Hon. Richard J. Leon
Status
Preliminary Approval Pending (motion filed December 18, 2025)
Final Approval Hearing
Pending
Courtroom 18, 333 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, DC
Class Period
October 24, 2007 through the date of preliminary approval
Class Representatives
Peter Burke; Kent Harrison; Marin P. Heiskell; Brian Byrnes
Class Co-Lead Counsel
Finkelstein Thompson LLP (Douglas G. Thompson); Lovell Stewart Halebian Jacobson LLP (Christopher Lovell)
Statewide Classes
California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan
Attorneys' Fees
Up to 30% of fund (requested)
Service Awards
Up to $17,500 per class representative (requested)
Claim Deadline
Pending — approximately 180 days after preliminary approval
Proof Required
Likely No (pending final claim form)
Payment Method
Digital via email (PayPal or virtual debit card); mailed check available on request
Estimated Payment Timing
Approximately 6 months after final approval if no appeals
Does NOT Cover
Credit card transactions; cash advances; prepaid cards; foreign-issued cards
Administrator
A.B. Data, Ltd. (proposed)
Key Allegations
Antitrust — Visa/Mastercard network rules blocked IATM operators from charging differential access fees, allegedly inflating consumer surcharges