Skip to content

GEICO faces class action over added drivers and insurance premium hikes

GEICO faces class action over added drivers and insurance premium hikes

GEICO faces a proposed class action in Florida federal court alleging the insurer added unrelated drivers to policyholders’ auto coverage without consent, triggering higher premiums.

Plaintiff Allison Kane filed the complaint on Jan. 28 in the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

The lawsuit alleges violations of state and federal consumer protection laws and seeks class certification.

According to the filing, GEICO used third-party data sources to identify individuals listed as licensed or permitted drivers associated with an insured’s address.

The case is Kane v. GEICO Casualty Company, Case No. 6:26-cv-00225, pending in federal court in Florida.

If a policyholder failed to respond within a specified period, the company allegedly added the identified individual as a covered driver and adjusted the premium.

Kane states GEICO emailed her in February 2024 indicating that an individual named Carter K. Riddle might be a licensed or permitted driver connected to her address.

When she did not respond within 15 days, GEICO allegedly added the individual to her policy, increasing her premium.

The complaint alleges GEICO did not verify residency before making the additions and did not disclose the consumer reporting agency or data used to support the change.

Kane further claims the insurer declined to remove added individuals even after insureds asserted the person had no connection to their household or carried separate coverage.

The proposed class includes US policyholders who received notice that a driver would be added based on third-party information and who paid higher premiums after the addition occurred without affirmative action.

Claims in the lawsuit include breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violation of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.

The plaintiff seeks damages, costs, fees, and a jury trial. No court has ruled on the merits of the allegations.

According to Beinsure analysts, disputes over household driver underwriting and third-party data usage have increased as carriers expand automated policy review processes to manage loss exposure and premium adequacy.