Arlo security camera class action overview:
- Who: A security camera customer is suing Arlo Technologies.
- Why: The plaintiff says Arlo is removing a cloud storage feature on the cameras that consumers paid for.
- Where: The Arlo security camera class action was filed in a Michigan federal court.
Arlo Technologies is taking away certain cloud storage features of its security cameras that consumers paid for, a new class action lawsuit alleges.
Plaintiff Lonn Rider filed the class action lawsuit against Arlo Technologies Inc. on Jan. 12 in a Michigan federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws.
According to the lawsuit, the company made and sold home security cameras under the Arlo brand with the marketing, “7 days FREE Cloud Recordings.”
Arlo promised to give customers access to motion- and audio-triggered recordings
from the previous seven days for free, the lawsuit states, adding the words, “and the plan never expires!” to its marketing.
However, Arlo has decided to take away this feature of its product by recently eliminating free seven day cloud storage, as reported by “The Verge” on Jan. 2, 2023, the lawsuit states.
Arlo sold cameras at a premium price due to cloud storage offering, lawsuit states
The promise of a cloud recording of security footage was common to all varieties of Arlo cameras and a key differentiator in the market for such remote home security cameras, the lawsuit states.
The company was also aware that “Free Cloud Storage” was significant to prospective purchasers, allegedly stating, “Why commit to a long-term contract or pay expensive monthly subscription fees? Arlo can save you hundreds of dollars a year,” Rider says
“Arlo purchasers expected cloud storage was part of the deal when they purchased their higher-priced Arlo cameras and did not expect this to be revoked, certainly not at such an early time relative to their continued functionality.”
As a result of the allegedly false and misleading representations, the Arlo cameras are sold at premium prices beginning at $75, the lawsuit states.
Rider seeks to represent a class of Michigan consumers who bought the Arlo security cameras, plus a consumer fraud multi-state class of consumers from South Dakota, Wyoming, Idaho, Alaska, Iowa, Mississippi, Arkansas, Kansas, Arizona, and Utah.
He is suing for breach of state consumer laws, breach of warranty, fraud and unjust enrichment, and seeks certification of the class action, damages, fees, costs and a jury trial.
Meanwhile, in 2021 Ring was hit with a class action lawsuit alleging the maker of the online security system unfairly hides a monthly service fee from buyers, even though the system is rendered useless if customers do not pay the fee.
Did you buy an Arlo security camera with free 7-day cloud storage? Let us know your thoughts on this class action lawsuit in the comments!
The plaintiff is represented by Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan & Associates, P.C.
The Arlo security camera class action lawsuit is Lonn Rider et al., v. Arlo Technologies Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-00055 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, Southern Division.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
- Tech class action lawsuits allege product defects, misleading advertising
- LG smart TV recall announced due to tip-over, entrapment hazards
- Samsung class action alleges company falsely advertises Galaxy S21 storage capacity
- Frigidaire, Electrolux, AEG ranges have defective control knobs, class action claims
Data privacy investigation: website tracking, data collection and information sharing
July 7, 2026 | Lawsuits to Join
102 thoughts onArlo class action claims company falsely advertised security camera cloud storage
Literally just sent them an email expressing my feelings on the fact they deleted the recordings I paid for just because I can’t pay for next month shouldn’t give them the right to delete what was recorded this month I mean hell ain’t that what I paid for? It’s messed up already that we have to buy there devices then pay every month for it to record what it wants because it definitely doesn’t catch everything but then they can just delete what I paid them for when they want to
I am literally having an argument with them now because they deleted recordings I had when my monthly subscription wasn’t over yet. I can sorta see if it recorded something now that my monthly is over but how can they remove what I did pay for? It’s pretty messed up in my opinion that we have to buy a device and then pay for someone to record what it wants to because it definitely doesn’t record everything but then they delete what was paid for
Was never told my cameras was out of date and kept charging my 49.99 a month for a year. Until I caught that my cameras wasn’t linking up and then they told me
Been a customer for over 10 years with a free subscription … without a subscription or buy new devices I can’t set a simple schedule… they say obsolete.. but of u buy a subscription they will support !!
Extortion!!