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

The Junk Fee Ban Act and pricing transparency legislation.
By Sarah J. Reusché and Jacob Rotolo April 23, 2025
If enacted, the Junk Fee Ban Act would protect consumers from hidden fees and promote fair business practices in Illinois. While there has yet to be legislation in the proposed Junk Fee Ban Act that excludes dealerships, it will be important to look for future updates on this bill, as Illinois is quickly becoming a hub for vehicle innovation and automotive plant expansion.
Ancillary probate is required when a person dies owning real estate outside of their home state.
By Heather A. McCollum April 21, 2025
When someone passes away owning property in another state, their estate may need to go through ancillary probate—a secondary court process in that state.
$9.9 Million Dollar Purchase of Packaged Multi-Unit Properties
By Commercial Real Estate April 18, 2025
Lavelle Law represented a joint venture in its $9.9 million acquisition of four multi-unit buildings.
Type F Reorg offers a means of achieving structural change while preserving tax continuity
By Steven A. Migala and Nathan P. Toy April 14, 2025
A Type F reorganization (“F Reorg”), governed by Section 368(a)(1)(F) of the Internal Revenue Code, provides a strategically significant mechanism for corporate restructuring. Defined as a “mere change in identity, form, or place of organization of one corporation,” an F Reorg permits a corporation to alter its legal existence while being treated for federal tax purposes as the same entity. This recharacterization allows for the uninterrupted preservation of tax attributes while maintaining shareholder continuity.
Estate Planning for Your Pet: Securing Your Pet’s Future with a Pet Trust
By Jackie R. Luthringshausen April 10, 2025
When it comes to estate planning, most people think about providing for their loved ones—but what about the furry, feathered, or scaled members of your family? In the United States, 68% of households own at least one pet, according to the American Pet Products Association’s 2023-2024 National Pet Owners Survey. For many, pets are more than just companions—they’re family. Ensuring their care after your death or incapacity is a vital part of comprehensive estate planning. In Illinois, a Pet Trust offers a powerful solution to guarantee your pet’s well-being long after you’re gone.
IRS Press Release Addresses Payment Plan Options
By Timothy M. Hughes April 10, 2025
IRS Press Release Addresses Payment Plan Options - A recent press release by the IRS addressed the options that are available to taxpayers who may owe more on April 15th than they can pay. The IRS advised taxpayers that they do not need to wait until April 15 to file their 2024 federal return, and if they owe and are unable to pay the balance in full, there are payment plans available to help them pay their tax obligation.
Learn about essential legal protections to strengthen your business and safeguard your interests.
By Lavelle Law April 9, 2025
Join us on May 21 in Schaumburg for an engaging Breakfast Briefs seminar, delving into vital strategies to fortify your business. This session will explore the critical role of crafting ironclad non-compete agreements, shielding your trade secrets, and mastering the nuances of temporary restraining orders (TROs) and injunctive relief. Our presenters, attorneys Matthew Sheahin and Jennifer Tee, bring a wealth of experience in this legal domain. Seize this chance to bolster your company’s legal protections and lay a solid groundwork for enduring success!
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.
More Posts