Third-party filer, ClaimClam, recently came under scrutiny during the $725 million settlement dispute over Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal. The firm, which leverages artificial intelligence to pinpoint class members in exchange for a 15% commission, tendered claims on behalf of about 15,000 class members. These claims were denied by the settlement administrator on the grounds of insufficient identifying information. Details of the controversy revolve around ClaimClam’s prominent role also in the $255 million settlement agreement with Juul.
The functionality and legitimacy of third-party filers like ClaimClam have become pertinent issues within the class-action bar. By inserting themselves into existing negotiations and settlement agreements, these firms strive to capture a portion of the eventual payout. Yet, as evidenced in the case with Facebook, their methods and outcomes are not always viewed favorably by other involved parties.
As the legal industry continues to navigate an evolving landscape with the advent of artificial intelligence and other technological advancements, companies like ClaimClam challenge existing norms and invite rigorous examination into their practices and impacts on class action settlements.