Blog Post

BIPA Compliance: A Guide for Vehicle Dealerships to Mitigate Litigation Risks

Sarah J. Reusche and Nathan Toy • April 30, 2024
A person is pressing a button on a virtual screen.

In this era of technological innovation, the adoption of biometric data for various applications in the workplace has surged. From fingerprint scans for timekeeping to facial recognition for access control, biometric technology has become a key aspect of modern business operations. However, this integration has also raised privacy and security concerns, leading to legislative responses aimed at protecting individuals' biometric information. At the forefront of this is the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”). 


Vehicle dealerships particularly have recently found themselves needing to navigate the complex terrain of adhering to the BIPA’s stringent requirements to avoid being targeted through lawsuits. There has been a recent noticeable uptick in class action lawsuits under the BIPA, serving as a critical wake-up call for the automotive retail industry, highlighting the need for dealerships to review and enhance their practices if they are using biometric technology. 


Class Action Suits Under the BIPA


BIPA class action lawsuits have targeted employers who use biometric systems to track workers’ paid hours or to control access to secured or sensitive areas in a workplace. An example of this can be seen in this class action lawsuit filed in September of 2023, in which a Chicago area car dealership was accused of violating the BIPA by requiring workers to access a secure vehicle key box at the dealership. Along with granting the employee access to a key, the system created audit trails to identify the employees, and the employees’ biometric information was enrolled and retained in the dealership’s database and cloud system. 


The suit noted that this could expose employees to serious and irreversible privacy risks due to the potential danger of the database being breached, and the employees having no means by which to prevent identity theft and unauthorized tracking. The Plaintiffs also allege that the Defendants violated the BIPA by not properly informing employees of the collection and storage, not providing a publicly available retention schedule and guidelines for the destruction of the fingerprint information, and not obtaining a written release from the employees authorizing the collection and storage of their biometric information. Another example of biometric system usage that could result in such a lawsuit is collecting and storing employee fingerprints for timekeeping purposes. 


How Dealers Can Protect Themselves 


The most effective way for a vehicle dealership to protect themselves is to ensure compliance by being aware of the following issues: 


What disclosures are being made? The BIPA requires a written notice explaining that biometric information will be collected, the purpose for doing so, and the length of time the information will be retained. Creating a clear company policy concerning the collection, use, retention, and security of biometric information will, if done properly and provided to employees, satisfy notice requirements and may also help ease some concerns from employees.


Is a written release being obtained? In addition to providing notice, a “written release” must be obtained prior to collecting and storing an individual’s biometric information to serve as written consent. 


Is there a written policy for retention and deletion? If a company collects or stores biometric data, then it must have a written policy for handling such data. This written policy must include a retention schedule and guidelines for permanently destroying the data when required. 


Enforcement 


The BIPA carries a private right of action for harmed individuals and includes statutory damages of $1,000 per negligent violation and $5,000 per intentional violation, or actual damages, whichever is greater. Additionally, successful plaintiffs may receive reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, and courts can issue an injunction to order the offending party to change their practices to comply with the Act’s requirements. 


Given these harsh penalties and the risk of non-compliance, dealers should contact legal counsel for advice on how to best navigate the BIPA. For further inquiries or questions, please contact attorney Sarah Reusche at sreusche@lavellelaw.com or (847) 705-7555. 


More News & Resources

Lavelle Law News and Events

FinCEN Eliminates BOI Reporting Obligations!
By Frank P. Portera March 25, 2025
On March 21, 2025, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued its interim final rule stating that those entities previously classified as "domestic reporting companies" are now exempt from all BOI reporting requirements. On the other hand, all foreign entities registered to do business in the USA must file their own initial BOI reports within 30 days of the initial final rule's publication, if they have not done so already.
Join us April 3, 2025 for Business After Hours 5-7 PM
By Lavelle Law March 19, 2025
Spring is here, and with baseball season kicking off, we’re stepping up to the plate with our annual Lavelle Law Business After Hours event. We’re excited to partner with our friends in the Schaumburg business community for an evening of networking, good vibes, and a few surprises—all hosted in the friendly confines of our Schaumburg office. Bonus points: Feel free to rock your favorite baseball team’s gear and show off your fandom while you’re at it!
Delaware Court  Provides the Standard of Supreme Review for the Redomestication of Corporations
By Steven A. Migala and Anthony Letto March 12, 2025
Delaware corporations seeking to redomesticate to another state should be advised that on February 4, 2025, the Delaware Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision in Palkon v. Maffei, C.A. No. 2023-0449-JTL, addressing a challenge to TripAdvisor's redomestication from a Delaware corporation to a Nevada corporation. The case raised important questions regarding the standard of review applicable to such reincorporations, particularly when fiduciaries may derive a benefit from shifting to a legal regime perceived as more friendly.
Illinois residential zoning laws and significant opportunities for property owners.
By Chance W. Badertscher March 12, 2025
Recent legislative efforts in Illinois are reshaping the state’s approach to residential zoning, with significant implications for the housing market. A new bill, House Bill 1814, introduced last week, aims to eliminate single-family zoning in municipalities across Illinois. If passed, this bill will allow for the development of multi-unit buildings in areas currently zoned exclusively for single-family homes. This initiative, alongside a similar bill introduced last year, has the potential to address the state’s growing housing shortage and make housing more affordable for middle-class families.
LATEST UPDATE on the Corporate Transparency Act and BOI Report Filings
By Frank J. Portera and James Berg March 11, 2025
On February 27, 2025, FinCEN issued an immediate press release stating it would not impose fines, penalties, or take any other enforcement actions against companies that fail to file or update Beneficial Ownership Information ("BOI") reports pursuant to the Corporate Transparency Act ("CTA") by the current deadlines. FinCEN also announced that it would be revising BOI reporting deadlines through an interim final rule set to be issued no later than March 21, 2025.
IRS Releases its List of Dirty Dozen Tax Scams for 2025
By Timothy M. Hughes March 10, 2025
The IRS recently published its yearly list of most prevalent tax scams known as its Dirty Dozen. The list is obviously not exhaustive but an attempt to warn taxpayers of trends seen by the IRS. The IRS list of tax scams for 2025 came with a warning for taxpayers, businesses, and tax professionals to watch out for common schemes that threaten their tax and financial information.
Success Story – Small Business Owner Recovers Substantial Amount Levied by the State
By Tax Law March 5, 2025
Lavelle Law represented a small Illinois business owner who had accumulated a large sales tax balance due to their accountant’s negligence. Unbeknownst to the client Illinois Department of Revenue (“IDOR”) was at the levy issuance phase in its collection. And the IDOR levied the taxpayer’s account right after the taxpayer had deposited funds from a HELOC that was obtained to provide capital to the company for the next 6 plus months.
New statutory provisions on potential income included in new Illinois child support law.
By Joseph A. Olszowka February 27, 2025
The Illinois legislature has recently taken a significant step in closing a longstanding loophole in child support. This amendment represents a pivotal change in how courts assess and calculate child support obligations, providing greater protections against those who attempt to evade their financial responsibilities.
LATEST UPDATE on the Corporate Transparency Act and New Deadline for Filing BOIR
By Frank J. Portera February 20, 2025
This article will serve as another update to the ongoing Corporate Transparency Act developments. As of February 17, 2025, a federal judge in the Eastern District of Texas lifted the injunction it had ordered on January 7, 2025, in Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, 6:24-cv-00336 (E.D. Tex.), allowing the federal government to once again enforce the Corporate Transparency Act and its Beneficial Ownership Information Report requirements.
A Step-by-Step Guide to Bringing a Lawsuit in Illinois
By Sarah J. Reusché February 14, 2025
This article is the second in our Litigation 101 series. It focuses on the flip side: how to sue someone else. Suing someone is a serious decision that requires careful thought and preparation. Before pursuing legal action, it’s crucial to reflect on the issue and understand the steps involved in bringing a lawsuit. This article outlines the basics to help you approach the process with confidence and make informed decisions.
More Posts
Share by: