Illinois Attorney General v. DoorDash – Pay Guarantee Model Settlement
Each eligible Dasher receives a proportional share of the settlement fund based on the amount of consumer tips allegedly used by DoorDash to satisfy guaranteed amounts
This settlement is closed to new claims — the deadline was February 10, 2025. You can still see what it was about and follow the case in court below. Looking for money you can still claim? Browse open settlements →
What happened
DoorDash allegedly violated Illinois consumer protection laws by using Dashers' tips to help satisfy the minimum pay it guaranteed to Dashers between July 2017 and September 2019, and by misleading consumers into believing their tips would increase Dashers' earnings above DoorDash's promised pay. DoorDash denies these allegations and maintains the Pay Guarantee Model was fair and transparent.
Do you qualify?
Illinois-based Dashers who completed deliveries on DoorDash between July 2017 and September 2019, were paid under the Pay Guarantee Model, and received consumer tips on deliveries where those tips were allegedly used by DoorDash to satisfy the guaranteed amounts.
How to file
Fill out a Claim Form by the deadline of February 10, 2025. If completed by that date, you will receive your payment shortly after March 4, 2025.
Common questions
- How much does the Illinois Attorney General v. DoorDash – Pay Guarantee Model Settlement pay?
- Estimated payout: Each eligible Dasher receives a proportional share of the settlement fund based on the amount of consumer tips allegedly used by DoorDash to satisfy guaranteed amounts. Actual amounts depend on how many valid claims are filed — most settlements divide a fixed fund pro rata, so a higher claim rate means a smaller individual check. An "up to" figure is a cap, not a guarantee.
- What is the claim deadline for the Illinois Attorney General v. DoorDash – Pay Guarantee Model Settlement?
- This settlement is closed to new claims — the deadline was February 10, 2025. Once a claim deadline passes you generally forfeit your share, even if you qualified.
- Do I need proof of purchase for the Illinois Attorney General v. DoorDash – Pay Guarantee Model Settlement?
- Yes. This settlement asks for documentation supporting your claim — a receipt, an account record, or the notice you were sent. Check the official settlement website for exactly which documents are accepted.
- Is the Illinois Attorney General v. DoorDash – Pay Guarantee Model Settlement notice real, or a scam?
- DoorDash is the settlement administrator for this case. Claims are filed at ildoordashsettlement.com. Filing a class action claim is always free — no legitimate settlement charges you to claim, and no administrator will ask for payment, a gift card, or your full Social Security number by email or text. If a notice asks for any of those, it is not from the administrator. When in doubt, ignore the link you were sent and go to the official settlement website directly.
- When will payments from the Illinois Attorney General v. DoorDash – Pay Guarantee Model Settlement be sent?
- Class action payouts typically take 12 to 24 months after the claim deadline, and longer if the settlement is appealed. Payments cannot be issued until the court grants final approval and any appeals are resolved.
In the news
Headlines via NewsAPI. ClaimWatch isn't affiliated with these publications.
New to class actions?
This summary was generated from public settlement documents and may contain errors. Confirm eligibility, deadlines, and payment terms on the official settlement website before filing. ClaimWatch is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. Filing a claim is free.
More employment settlements
View all →EEOC v. Meathead Movers Age Discrimination Settlement
The EEOC alleged that Meathead Movers, Inc. violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act by engaging in age discrimination in hiring and recruitment since at least 2017. The company was accused of discriminating against job applicants based on their age. Meathead Movers agreed to settle these claims through a court-approved Consent Decree on October 14, 2025.
Up to $2 million total to be distributed among eligible class members
Skin Spirit Essential Wage and Hour Settlement
SkinSpirit Essential allegedly violated California wage and hour laws by improperly compensating non-exempt employees. The company is settling claims for wage violations during the class period and penalty claims under California's Private Attorney General Act.
Petzing v. The Seven Motor Corporation Employment Application Settlement
The Seven Motor Corporation allegedly failed to disclose the wage scale or salary range in its job postings for open positions in Washington. The defendant disputes the claims and contends it has not violated any law.
Up to $2,172.30
Hill v. Delphinus Engineering Inc. Settlement
Delphinus Engineering Inc. allegedly failed to disclose wage scales, salary ranges, and general descriptions of benefits and other compensation in job postings for open positions in Washington. The defendant disputes the claims and denies any violation of law.
The settlement fund ranges from $1,802,386.04 to $2,745,000.00 depending on the number of claims submitted.