Caliber Collision Lawsuit: 401(k) Forfeiture, Wages, and Consumer Fraud

Caliber Collision, the country’s largest collision repair chain, has been sued repeatedly over the past two decades. The most significant Caliber Collision lawsuit in recent years is a proposed class action alleging the company improperly used more than $4 million in forfeited employee 401(k) funds to offset its own contributions; that case reached a confidential settlement in May 2026. The company has also faced multiple wage-and-hour suits from repair workers and, back in 2004, paid $5.3 million to settle a California consumer fraud case over billing and repair practices.

The $4 Million 401(k) Forfeiture Class Action

On September 10, 2025, former employee Roy Fordyce filed a proposed class action against Wand Newco 3, Inc., the corporate entity doing business as Caliber Collision, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.¹ The case, Fordyce v. Wand Newco 3, Inc. (No. 4:25-cv-00997), was assigned to Chief District Judge Amos L. Mazzant.²

The complaint accused Caliber of violating the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by mishandling funds employees forfeited when they left before their employer-matched 401(k) contributions fully vested. ERISA expects fiduciaries to use forfeitures for the benefit of plan participants, either by covering plan administrative expenses or by boosting participant benefits. Fordyce alleged Caliber instead routed those forfeitures to reduce its own mandatory employer contributions, saving the company money at workers’ expense.³

What the Complaint Alleged

The lawsuit claimed the practice saved Caliber more than $4 million from 2019 through 2022:³

2019: $621,634
2020: $625,248
2021: $1,499,053
2022: $1,362,338

Meanwhile, according to the complaint, plan participants were footing the bill for running the plan. From 2019 through 2023, workers paid more than $6 million in fees to third-party service providers, while Caliber directed just $112,238 of forfeited assets toward those expenses. That works out to less than 2% of available forfeitures going to the purpose Fordyce said ERISA required.³

Caliber’s Response

Caliber moved to dismiss on November 17, 2025, arguing the complaint failed to state a plausible claim. The company said using forfeitures to offset employer contributions is a lawful, established practice; ERISA does not require employers to subsidize plan expenses; the payment of benefits is not a prohibited transaction under Supreme Court precedent; and the suit sought a windfall beyond what plan documents promised.⁴

How It Ended

The court never ruled on the merits. Judge Mazzant referred the case to mediation on February 11, 2026. The parties met with U.S. Magistrate Judge Zack Hawthorn on May 14, 2026, and five days later the mediator reported the case settled. A May 26 order directed the parties to file closing papers by June 26, 2026. The settlement terms are confidential; under the court’s order, neither side may disclose anything about the mediation beyond the fact of resolution.⁵

The Fordyce case fits a wider pattern. Since fall 2023, more than 30 similar class actions have been filed against employers under the same ERISA theory, and courts have split on whether the claims can survive dismissal.¹

Wage and Hour Lawsuits

Caliber has faced multiple worker suits challenging its commission-based pay structure.

In December 2017, a former body technician and service advisor filed Moorehead et al v. Caliber Holdings Corporation (No. 5:17-cv-1308) in Oklahoma. He alleged he was paid about 5% of vehicle repair costs as commission and that his pay frequently fell below minimum wage when commissions did not exceed his weekly advance. The suit also claimed workers regularly logged at least 50 hours a week without overtime and that 30-minute lunch breaks were deducted whether or not employees took them. The plaintiff said he was fired after complaining about the pay practices.⁶

In February 2015, a putative class action filed in California state court alleged Caliber systematically shorted mechanics by not paying them for time spent waiting for work.⁷ In 2018, former repairman Luis Uribe filed a similar case in California, alleging employees were not separately paid for non-commission tasks such as cleaning tools or attending mandatory meetings, that overtime was miscalculated, and that workers were encouraged to clock out while continuing to work. The case was removed to federal court and then remanded to Los Angeles County Superior Court after the judge found the defendants had not demonstrated federal jurisdiction.⁸

The 2004 California Consumer Fraud Settlement

In December 2003, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer and Fresno County District Attorney Elizabeth Egan sued Caliber Bodyworks, Inc. and several subsidiaries in Fresno County Superior Court, seeking $50 million in civil penalties and consumer restitution.⁹ The complaint accused the company of billing for work never performed and parts never installed, doing unauthorized repairs, misrepresenting used or reconditioned parts as new, and willfully disregarding accepted quality standards.

Caliber settled for $5.3 million. Orange County Superior Court Judge Michael Brenner entered final judgment and a permanent injunction on August 19, 2004. Caliber agreed to the terms without admitting liability. The payment included $3.3 million in civil penalties and $2 million for investigation and prosecution costs, spread over five years.¹⁰

The settlement also required Caliber to offer remediation to roughly 100 victims identified by the state’s Bureau of Automotive Repair, in the form of free repairs or full reimbursement. Approximately 56,000 customers who had paid more than $1,000 for repairs between August 2002 and July 2004 became entitled to a free vehicle inspection, with corrective work at no cost if problems were found. Separately, the Bureau of Automotive Repair reached a $500,000 settlement placing all 38 of Caliber’s California shops on three years of probation, with 19 facing short operational suspensions.¹¹

Consumer Complaints Have Continued

Repair-quality complaints against Caliber have not stopped. As of mid-2026, the Better Business Bureau had logged 709 complaints against Caliber Collision Centers over the prior three years, with 246 in the most recent 12 months alone. Of those 709, 621 fall under service or repair issues. Common themes include misaligned panels, improper sensor installation, parts held on with adhesive or zip ties, and repair timelines that overrun estimates by weeks or months, often exhausting customers’ rental-car coverage. Of the 709 complaints, 125 were marked resolved to the consumer’s satisfaction, 579 were answered, and five remained unresolved.¹²

Why the Timing Matters

Caliber Collision was founded in 1997 and is headquartered in Lewisville, Texas. It operates more than 1,800 centers across 41 states and is backed by private equity firm Hellman & Friedman, which became majority sponsor after a December 2018 merger with competitor Abra.¹³

In July 2025, Caliber filed a confidential draft registration statement with the SEC for a proposed initial public offering, with reports suggesting it could raise several hundred million dollars. The Fordyce 401(k) suit landed just weeks after that filing became public, injecting fresh legal exposure into the company’s move toward the public markets.¹³

1
Bloomberg Law. Caliber Collision Ex-Worker Files Suit Over 401(k) Forfeitures
2
PACER Monitor. Fordyce v. Wand Newco 3, Inc.
3
Repairer Driven News. Caliber Sued for Allegedly Feeding Over $4 Million of Employee 401(k) Funds Into Its Bottom Line
4
Repairer Driven News. Caliber Seeks Dismissal of $4 Million Retirement Fund Lawsuit for Lack of Plausibility
5
Repairer Driven News. Retirement Funds Lawsuit Against Caliber Collision Settled
6
ClassAction.org. Lawsuit Seeks To Inspect Caliber Collision’s Pay Practices
7
Law360. Collision Repair Chain Hit With Calif. Wage Class Action
8
ClassAction.org. Operators of Caliber Collision Centers Facing Former Repairman’s Wage and Hour Suit
9
California Office of the Attorney General. Complaint for Injunction and Civil Penalties, People v. Caliber Bodyworks
10
California Office of the Attorney General. Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction, People v. Caliber Bodyworks
11
California Office of the Attorney General. Attorney General Lockyer Announces $5.8 Million Settlement With Caliber Car Repair Chain
12
Better Business Bureau. Caliber Collision Centers BBB Complaints
13
Auto Body News. Caliber Collision Files Confidentially for IPO