CCC repair-estimate data lawsuit over AI use of driver information

A proposed nationwide class action filed October 8, 2026 accuses CCC Intelligent Solutions of keeping drivers' personal information from collision repair estimates and using it to build artificial intelligence products without telling them. The case is Burries, et al. v. CCC Intelligent Solutions Inc., et al., No. 2:26-cv-11794, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Most drivers never deal with CCC directly. The lawsuit focuses on CCC ONE, the software many body shops use to write repair estimates. According to the plaintiffs' lawyers, the proposed class covers at least 15 million people named on estimates prepared on CCC ONE in the four years before the case was filed. These are allegations only. CCC has not answered in court, and nothing has been proven.

The plaintiffs are LaTrenda Burries of Redlands, Gloribel Garcia of Los Angeles and Katleen Saturné of Los Angeles County. According to Repairer Driven News, each was in a vehicle collision and sought repairs at a California collision repair facility.

The defendants are CCC Intelligent Solutions Inc. and CCC Intelligent Solutions Holdings Inc. CCC's about page describes the company as a leader in auto claims and collision repair technology that serves insurers, repairers, automakers and parts suppliers. Its platform page calls CCC ONE its total repair platform for repair shops.

The plaintiffs are represented by the Law Offices of Maro Burunsuzyan, a plaintiff practice in Glendale, California. Its press release says consumers with questions about the case may contact the firm at support@marolaw.com or (818) 507-5188. The release is marked as possible attorney advertising.

According to the firm's press release, when a body shop writes an estimate on CCC ONE, the customer's name, home address, phone number, insurance claim number, vehicle identification number, license plate and mileage are sent to and stored on CCC's servers. Repairer Driven News reports the suit also says CCC stores photos of damaged vehicles.

The complaint alleges CCC keeps this information, combines it with data from across its network, and uses it to build AI products and analytics that it licenses to other customers. It cites CCC's own public statements that it has processed more than $2 trillion of historical data and developed more than 400 AI models. The firm's release adds figures it says come from CCC statements quoted in the complaint: more than 30,500 repair facilities licensed to use CCC ONE and more than 19 million claims processed with CCC's AI through 2023.

The complaint quotes CCC's contracts with businesses. It says CCC's insurer agreement provides that CCC may use data to train AI services, and its repair-facility agreement reserves the shop's data for CCC's product improvement and research. It alleges no CCC privacy policy since April 2020 mentions AI or model training. The suit also cites three CCC patents it says describe systems that retrain on identifiable consumer and vehicle data.

The plaintiffs say drivers were never told, never asked and never paid. They argue that a shop's contract with CCC is not the consumer's consent, pointing to a clause that requires repair facilities to indemnify CCC for failing to obtain needed authorizations. The claimed harm is loss of privacy and control over personal information, plus being deprived of its economic value.

CCC told Repairer Driven News that it "doesn't comment on pending litigation." It had not filed a court response as of Monday, October 12. CCC's public CCC ONE data policy, last updated January 2026, says CCC uses stored data in the ordinary course of business, such as sending it to insurers to process claims. It says CCC may share data with third parties in de-identified, aggregated form so that repair facilities and their customers cannot be identified. That policy is CCC's general statement, not a response to the lawsuit.

Nothing has been decided. The complaint was filed October 8 and CourtListener shows the docket opened that day. CCC has not yet responded, and the court has not ruled on whether the claims can go forward.

The court has not certified any class. Certification is the step where a judge decides whether claims can proceed for a defined group. Until then, the class described in the complaint is a proposal.

The proposed nationwide class includes people in the United States identified as the vehicle owner or customer on a repair estimate prepared on CCC ONE by a U.S. collision repair facility. The period runs from four years before the complaint was filed through class certification, with limited exclusions. The complaint also proposes a nationwide intrusion subclass and a California subclass.

Two facts decide whether you might fit. First, you were named on a collision repair estimate in roughly the last four years. Second, the shop prepared that estimate on CCC ONE. Many drivers will not know which software their shop used. Ask the repair facility or your insurer, and keep your estimate paperwork. This article has not verified a standard marking that identifies CCC ONE on an estimate.

The California subclass applies to California consumers. Its exact definition is in the complaint, which this article did not read directly.

There is no claim form. If you think you may be covered, you can contact the plaintiffs' firm at the contact details listed in its press release, or ask your own lawyer. An inquiry through Class Action Pulse is also only an inquiry. None of these steps files a claim, joins the lawsuit or creates representation by itself.

You do not need to act now to remain a putative class member if a class is later certified. Gathering your repair estimates, insurance claim numbers and shop names will make it easier to answer questions later. Do not send claim numbers or VINs through general web forms you do not trust.

No money is available. The lawsuit asks for nominal and punitive damages and for restitution and disgorgement of the value CCC obtained from consumers' information. Those are requests, not awards.

The plaintiffs also seek court orders. They would bar CCC from using consumer information for AI training or other purposes beyond the estimate without consent, and require CCC to delete it. For the California subclass, they want CCC to tell consumers who it is, what it collects and why at or before the time data is entered, and to obtain consent before any use beyond preparing or sending estimates or valuations.

• October 8, 2026: complaint filed in the Central District of California.
• October 9, 2026: plaintiffs' firm issued its press release.
• October 12, 2026: CCC had not filed a court response, according to Repairer Driven News.

No claim, opt-out, objection or hearing deadline exists. If a class is certified or a settlement is reached, the court would approve a notice explaining any deadlines and rights.

Intrusion upon seclusion is a privacy claim for an intentional, highly offensive intrusion into someone's private affairs. California's Constitution lists privacy as an inalienable right in Article I, Section 1, and the complaint relies on that provision. The Unfair Competition Law is a California statute that targets unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business practices.

Disgorgement means giving up profits gained from the challenged conduct. De-identified data has identifying details removed so that individuals cannot reasonably be identified. A VIN is the 17-character vehicle identification number.

CCC will need to respond to the complaint, likely by answering or by moving to dismiss. Early motions could test whether the privacy and unjust enrichment theories can proceed and whether a nationwide class is workable. Any ruling would come from the court and would be reported separately.

A practical note: if you had a collision repair in the last four years, save the estimate and insurer letters now. Those papers are how you would later show whether your information was entered into CCC ONE.

CourtListener supports the case caption, number, court and filing date. The plaintiffs' press release and Repairer Driven News support the allegations, plaintiffs, claims, proposed class and relief. Repairer Driven News supports CCC's no-comment statement. CCC's website supports its business description and data policy. This article did not read the complaint directly, and figures about CCC's scale are stated as alleged.

Class Action Pulse is not a law firm and does not guarantee eligibility, representation or payment. This article is general information, not legal advice.