Class action accuses Citigroup of using tracking pixels to intercept data

Citigroup class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Plaintiff Franceska Herrera filed a class action lawsuit against Citigroup Inc.
• Why: Herrera claims Citigroup illegally intercepted the electronic communications of visitors to its website without their knowledge or consent.
• Where: The Citigroup class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

A new class action lawsuit alleges Citigroup illegally intercepted the electronic communications of its website visitors without their knowledge or consent. 

Plaintiff Franceska Herrera claims Citigroup caused and permitted third parties to intercept the contents of her communications and reveal her personal searches and content interests while she was using the company’s website, www.citi.com.

“During her use of the website, [the] plaintiff navigated to multiple pages on the website, unaware that [the] defendant was causing and permitting third parties to intercept the contents of her communications and reveal her personal searches and content interests,” the Citigroup class action lawsuit says. 

Herrera wants to represent a California class of consumers who accessed and used Citigroup’s website from July 22, 2025, to the present. 

Citigroup used tracking pixels for commercial gain, plaintiff alleges 

Herrera argues Citigroup secretly embedded and operated third-party tracking technologies on its website that intercepted the contents of users’ electronic communications in real time and without notice or consent.

“[Citigroup] intentionally deploys these technologies to accomplish its commercial objectives, including cross-session behavioral profiling, audience measurement, audience segmentation and the monetization of users’ browsing activity through targeted advertising,” the class action lawsuit says.

Herrera accuses Citigroup of unjust enrichment and intrusion upon seclusion, as well as violations of the California Constitution, the California Invasion of Privacy Act, California’s Unfair Competition Law and the Federal Wiretap Act.

The plaintiff demands a jury trial and requests declaratory and injunctive relief and an award of statutory, punitive, compensatory and nominal damages for herself and all class members.

Similar class action lawsuits were filed earlier this year against Hilton, LinkedIn, PNC Bank and Wells Fargo over claims they used pixel tracking and similar technologies to intercept users’ online communications without consent.

Have you accessed and used Citigroup’s website in the state of California? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Reuben D. Nathan of Nathan & Associates APC and Ross Cornell of the Law Offices of Ross Cornell APC.

The Citigroup class action lawsuit is Herrera v. Citigroup Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-08905, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Consumers allege P&G, Arm & Hammer ‘unscented’ deodorants contain fragrance
• Mazda class action alleges site tracks users who declined cookies
• Kind Patches class action claims dopamine patches do not work as advertised
• FragranceNet hit with class action allegations over unsolicited text messages