SeatGeek has been the target of several class action lawsuits and mass arbitration claims over the past few years, mostly built around allegations that the ticket marketplace hid mandatory fees until the final checkout screen. Other cases have challenged COVID-era refund practices, resale ticket markups in Florida, and the use of advertising trackers on the SeatGeek website. Outcomes have been uneven: one major settlement has already closed, a privacy case was dismissed, and the biggest fee-disclosure case was sent almost entirely to private arbitration.
Hidden-Fee Cases in New York and Nevada
The most developed of the fee lawsuits is Vasell v. SeatGeek, Inc., filed February 6, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.1ClassAction.org. SeatGeek Hit With Class Action Over Allegedly Hidden Online Junk Fees Three New York buyers alleged that SeatGeek advertised one price while browsing, then added roughly $28 to $31 per ticket in previously undisclosed fees at the checkout summary. The complaint said this violated Section 25.07 of New York’s Arts and Cultural Affairs Law, which requires ticket platforms to show the full price, including all fees, before a buyer selects a seat and bars the price from rising during the purchase.2New York State Senate. ACA Section 25.07 The proposed class covered at least 100,000 ticket sales, with the plaintiffs seeking a minimum of $5 in statutory damages per ticket, for a total above $5 million.3Complete Music Update. SeatGeek Sued in Multi-Million Class Action Over Ticket Price Listings in New York
On January 17, 2025, Judge Natasha C. Merle sent most of the case out of court. Four of the five named plaintiffs — Torell Vasell, Shantee Grant, Sean Biederman, and Ashley Edwards — had never opted out of the arbitration clause in SeatGeek’s Terms of Use, so the court ordered their claims into individual arbitration and stayed the case as to them. Only Alexander Zajac, who had opted out, remains in federal court. The court also dismissed the injunctive relief and unjust enrichment claims.4CaseMine. Vasell v. SeatGeek, Inc., 24-CV-009325CourtListener. Vasell v. SeatGeek, Inc.
Judge Merle also ruled that SeatGeek’s arbitration clause applied retroactively, reaching conduct that happened before some plaintiffs even accepted the current terms, and that the arbitrator rather than the court would decide most threshold questions about the agreement.4CaseMine. Vasell v. SeatGeek, Inc., 24-CV-00932
A parallel suit on the same theory, Carbonell v. SeatGeek, Inc. (Case No. 2:24-cv-02087), was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada on November 7, 2024. The complaint alleges the fee markup added about 35% to the total only at the final step, after billing information had been entered, and invokes Nevada’s statute requiring resellers to disclose the full ticket cost upfront. The proposed class would cover anyone in the United States who bought SeatGeek tickets to a Nevada event since November 7, 2020.6ClassAction.org. SeatGeek Lawsuit Claims Ticket Platform Hides Added Junk Fees Until Checkout No rulings had been reported as of January 2025.
Mass Arbitration Claims for New York and Nevada Buyers
Because SeatGeek’s Terms of Use block class actions for most users, two law firms — Labaton Keller Sucharow and Berger Montague — opened a mass arbitration track instead. They filed individual arbitration demands on behalf of consumers who bought tickets to live events in New York or Nevada between April 2022 and April 2025, citing New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350, the Arts and Cultural Affairs Law, and Nevada Revised Statutes section 598.39795.7Lantern by Labaton. SeatGeek
Individual recoveries were estimated at up to $500 or more, and New York statutory damages could reach $550. The firms worked on contingency. Intake has since closed to new clients, so this specific route is no longer accepting sign-ups.7Lantern by Labaton. SeatGeek
Why SeatGeek’s Terms Keep Shaping These Cases
SeatGeek’s Terms of Use, most recently updated October 1, 2025, require users to resolve disputes through binding individual arbitration and bar participation in class proceedings unless they opt out within the window set by the terms. The arbitration requirement reaches claims that arose before the user accepted the current version.8SeatGeek. Terms of Use The Vasell ruling showed how heavily that clause weighs on class claims against the company: one opt-out plaintiff kept his case in court, the other four were pushed into private arbitration.
Florida Resale Price-Cap Case
A different legal theory sits behind Weinstein v. SeatGeek Inc. (Case No. 9:25-cv-81314), filed October 23, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Max Weinstein, a Boca Raton resident, alleges that SeatGeek violated Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and a state statute capping resale ticket markups at $1 above the original price for multiday or multievent entertainment complexes.9Top Class Actions. SeatGeek Class Action Alleges Company Overcharges for Resale Tickets in Florida
Weinstein says he paid $539.28 in fees for 2025 Formula 1 Miami Grand Prix tickets in April and $6,310.84 in fees on another purchase in May.10ClassAction.org. Weinstein v. SeatGeek, Inc., Complaint He is seeking class certification, damages, and a jury trial. SeatGeek had not filed a public response as of mid-2026.
COVID-19 Refund Settlement (Now Closed)
SeatGeek’s first wave of class action trouble came in April 2020, when William Trader sued in Manhattan federal court after the company declined to issue cash refunds for events canceled during the pandemic. The complaint alleged SeatGeek quietly changed its buyer guarantee from a full cash refund to a refund-or-credit at the company’s discretion.11New York Post. SeatGeek Sued for Refusing to Give Refunds Over Coronavirus Cancelations
That litigation produced the Vigil, et al. v. SeatGeek Inc. settlement. Consumers who bought tickets through SeatGeek’s mobile website between September 10, 2019 and March 17, 2020 for later-canceled events could choose extended SeatGeek credit or a full cash refund. The claim deadline was August 14, 2023, and the settlement is now closed to new claims.12Top Class Actions. SeatGeek COVID-19 Event Ticket Refunds Class Action Settlement
Tracking Pixel Case Dismissed
In August 2025, Jose Torres filed a proposed class action in the Northern District of California alleging that SeatGeek installed TikTok and Meta tracking pixels on its site to collect phone numbers, email addresses, and device data without consent for targeted advertising, in violation of California’s trap and trace law under the state’s Invasion of Privacy Act.13ClassAction.org. Torres v. SeatGeek, Inc., Complaint
On May 28, 2026, Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler dismissed the case for lack of standing, finding “no reasonable expectation of privacy in information like IP addresses, cookie identifiers, and device model” and that Torres had not shown the information was embarrassing or that its disclosure would be “highly offensive.”14Bloomberg Law. SeatGeek Dodges Proposed Class Action Over TikTok, Meta Trackers Torres was granted leave to file an amended complaint.15Law360. SeatGeek Ditches Site User’s Data Tracking Suit, for Now
Forced-Platform Case (SeatGeek Dropped Out)
SeatGeek was briefly a co-defendant alongside Ticketmaster and Vivid Seats in Smith v. Ticketmaster (Case No. 2:25-cv-01337), filed June 30, 2025, in the Eastern District of Louisiana. The plaintiff alleged that orders placed through SeatGeek and Vivid Seats were silently routed through Ticketmaster’s proprietary SafeTix system.16TicketNews. Ticketmaster, SeatGeek and Vivid Seats Sued Over Forced Platform Ticketing The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed SeatGeek on September 2, 2025, so the case no longer involves the company.17PACER Monitor. Smith v. Ticketmaster, LLC et al
The FTC Rule and SeatGeek’s Switch to All-In Pricing
Much of the fee-disclosure fight has been overtaken by federal regulation. The FTC’s Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees took effect May 12, 2025, and applies to live-event ticketing, including resale.18Federal Trade Commission. FTC Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees Take Effect May 12, 2025 It requires platforms to display the total price, inclusive of all mandatory fees, whenever a ticket is advertised, and that total must be shown more prominently than any other price element. The rule bans bait-and-switch pricing but does not cap or ban specific fees.19Federal Register. Trade Regulation Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees
SeatGeek had already pledged all-in pricing in June 2023 after a White House roundtable on junk fees.20BrooklynVegan. Ticketmaster, SeatGeek Pledge to Switch to All-In Pricing Following Junk Fees Outrage It completed the transition after the FTC rule was published.7Lantern by Labaton. SeatGeek That change does not resolve claims based on fees charged before the switch, which is what the pending lawsuits and arbitration demands cover.