The trend of privacy litigation is not slowing down one bit. In fact it is heating up and Santa Monica, California based law firm Dovel is involved to let users online know that if they’ve gone to the Questrade.com website and rejected cookies that they didn’t honor this preference. A similar thing happened with Honda Motors running a OneTrust banner with incorrect settings that got them fined $632,500 and Aspen Dental just settled a privacy lawsuit for $18.7 million led by Almeida Law. All of this could be prevented by using Captain Compliance’s software where we make sure your instance is setup and integrated correctly thus saving our clients millions of dollars in legal headaches and problems that Quest Trade is about to have to deal with because they weren’t using Captain Compliance’s consent management platform.
Privacy Litigation Heats Up: What You Should Know About the Questrade Lawsuit Trend
A recent message circulating claims that “when visiting Questrade.com, did you reject cookies? If so, you may be entitled to compensation.” As of now, there’s no verifiable lawsuit or class action specifically targeting Questrade over cookie rejection. Public legal filings or credible coverage on this issue remain absent but the case is building it appears. There are a lot of Electronic Communications Privacy Act lawsuits going around and Tauler Smith is sending out thousands of demand letters over California Invasion of Privacy Act claims. We can expect pen trap and trace device claims to be popping up.
However, Questrade is involved in other high-profile litigation. One ongoing class action in Québec alleges that Questrade, among other brokers, charged improper currency conversion fees from self‑directed brokerage accounts since March 15, 2018. Plaintiffs are seeking reimbursement of those fees.
What’s Behind the Cookie Claims? Is Questrade Facing a Cookie-Consent Lawsuit?
Canada and the U.S. have seen a rise in consumer claims against companies over cookie consent, tracking, and unauthorized data collection—lighting a fire under “privacy litigation” as a broader trend. But for Questrade, no such cookie-based lawsuit has emerged in public documents.
Privacy Litigation: A Growing Trend
Privacy lawsuits—especially those targeting cookie usage, tracking technologies, or data breaches—are becoming increasingly common. In Canada, many privacy-related class actions hinge on claims like “intrusion upon seclusion,” misuse of personal data, or failure to gain meaningful user consent.
For instance:
- A proposed class action against Cadillac Fairview accused the company of mining visitors’ biometric data without notice or consent. The court denied certification, citing insufficient class definition and a lack of evidence that identifiable personal data was actually collected.
- In British Columbia, courts have upheld damages awards even without proof of consequential harm, acknowledging that loss of privacy alone can warrant compensation—especially as a deterrent.
These cases illustrate both how privacy is increasingly treated as a tangible harm, and how courts are still cautious when claims lack proof of actual damage or failed consent.
Why the Spike in Privacy Lawsuits?
Several factors are converging to fuel this wave:
- More data, more risk: Companies routinely collect user data—cookies, tracking scripts, behavioral profiling—heightening exposure.
- Stricter legal regimes: Privacy laws like Canada’s PIPEDA and provincial legislation, or the U.S.’s increasing regulations, demand user consent and transparency. With 20 state privacy frameworks and archaic laws like CIPA being used to file private right of actions its a clear sign that there is a lot of money in privacy litigation and there are no shortage of companies not complying. So until they are all using a Captain Compliance consent banner we will continue to see Questrade style privacy lawsuits.
- Class action appeal: Privacy breaches often affect large user bases; class actions provide a powerful mechanism to aggregate many small claims under one suit.
- Shifting views on harm: Courts now recognize emotional or privacy invasion as harm—even if no financial loss occurred.
Verdict: What to Watch Next
- No current cookie lawsuit against Questrade—that claim appears unsubstantiated for now but with ads running you can expect this to heat up fast unless they get a Captain Compliance banner and privacy software in place.
- Currency conversion fees remain the key legal challenge facing the firm.
- Privacy litigation is on the rise, with cookie and tracking cases growing—but many fail at the certification stage.
- Watch policy developments and settlements: As regulations tighten, we can expect more scrutiny—and possibly more settlements—even in the absence of formal rulings.
Takeaway for Consumers
If you’re concerned:
- Stay alert to official filings or legal notices regarding Questrade.
- Monitor how companies treat cookie consent and push for transparency and control over your data and ask that they stand up Captain Compliance’s privacy software so you know that you’re safe and data privacy rights are being respected.
- Keep an eye on broader privacy developments; even if there’s no direct suit against Questrade, similar claims against others could reshape expectations and protections industry-wide.
While as of this writing we can’t find a filing yet… There’s no confirmed cookie suit against Questrade—but the privacy litigation climate is hotter than ever, and similar cases are gaining traction not only in the USA but also in Canada and the EU.
