Home Depot faces ALPR lawsuit

Home Depot is facing a proposed class action in federal court in California over its use of automated license plate reader cameras in store parking lots. The suit, filed May 1 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, accuses the retailer of running a “covert surveillance operation” through ALPR systems installed at entrances and exits of its California stores. (classaction.org) The complaint names Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. and The Home Depot, Inc. as defendants and says the systems were deployed primarily through vendor Flock Safety. Connecticut stores are part of the broader public debate but not the core of the filed case now visible in court records. (cga.ct.gov) NBC Connecticut reported on May 6 that Home Depot and Lowe’s were using license plate readers at some Connecticut locations, including a Lowe’s in Newington, and said the cameras capture plate images along with the date, time and general location. CT Insider, as quoted by Government Technology, reported that police in Connecticut could access data from cameras at both chains’ stores. ### What exactly does the lawsuit accuse Home Depot of doing? The May 1 complaint says Home Depot installed ALPR cameras at 233 California stores, which it describes as the company’s largest single-state footprint. (classaction.org) Plaintiffs William F. Schmierer, Mark Ausseiker, Elzy Linder, John Hopton and Michael J. Harhay allege the retailer collected license plate information and related vehicle data without a California-compliant privacy policy or legally sufficient access controls. The filing says Home Depot allowed Flock Safety to feed ALPR information into a wider network that was searchable by outside agencies, including out-of-state and federal users. (nbcconnecticut.com) The complaint alleges that practice violated California’s ALPR Privacy Act, the California Constitution, state unfair-competition law and other privacy and negligence claims. Those are allegations by the plaintiffs; the docket entries surfaced so far do not show a court ruling on the merits. ### How do the Connecticut parking-lot cameras fit into this story? Connecticut reporting in early May showed that similar systems were operating at some Home Depot and Lowe’s locations there. (classaction.org) NBC Connecticut reported that Lowe’s described the cameras as tools that automatically capture vehicle and plate images, plus time and location data. Government Technology, citing CT Insider, reported that law enforcement officials said police could access data from the retailers’ Connecticut cameras and identified Flock Safety as the manufacturer. CyberGuy reported on May 14 that Home Depot said the cameras were used for theft prevention and customer and employee safety, and that the company said it did not grant federal law enforcement access to its license plate readers. (classaction.org) That statement did not resolve questions about local or out-of-state police access, which have become central in Connecticut’s separate policy fight. ### What have Home Depot and Lowe’s said publicly? Home Depot said the cameras were part of long-standing parking-area security measures used to prevent theft and protect customers and associates. NBC Connecticut also reported that Home Depot’s privacy policy says it does not sell or share information to a third party, while Lowe’s policy says it does not sell ALPR information and shares it only with its service provider and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. (nbcconnecticut.com) Lowe’s was not named in the California complaint reviewed here. Public reporting in Connecticut has grouped the two chains together because both have used the technology at some stores in the state. (cyberguy.com) ### Why is Connecticut moving on ALPR rules now? Gov. Ned Lamont signed Public Act 26-14 last week, setting new restrictions on how Connecticut public agencies and law enforcement agencies can use and share ALPR data. The law includes limits on sharing and retention and takes effect October 1, 2026, according to the bill text and legislative analysis. A separate Connecticut bill, HB 5449, would also regulate ALPR systems used by public agencies and law enforcement and remained on the legislative agenda as of mid-May. (nbcconnecticut.com) The Connecticut measures described in the bill materials focus on public agencies and police, not private retailers. That distinction has helped push attention toward what rules, if any, govern store-run systems and vendor access when retailers collect plate data on private property. (nbcconnecticut.com) ### What happens next in the court case? The Northern District of California docket shows the case was filed on May 1 under number 3:26-cv-03967. PacerMonitor and CourtListener both list the matter as pending, and the complaint seeks class-action status, damages, injunctive relief and a jury trial. No merits ruling appears in the public docket snapshots surfaced in this reporting. (cga.ct.gov) October 1, 2026 is the key next policy date in Connecticut because that is when the new public-agency ALPR restrictions are scheduled to take effect. In the California case, the next named milestone will come through further docket filings in Schmierer v. (cga.ct.gov) Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. in the Northern District of California. (pacermonitor.com)