More than 640,000 Grubhub diners and drivers will receive automatic payouts totaling over $23.8 million after the Federal Trade Commission found the delivery platform deceived workers about pay and locked customers out of their own accounts.
The FTC, joined by the Illinois Attorney General, took action against Grubhub in 2024 over what the agency called a pattern of unlawful conduct aimed at the drivers, diners, and small restaurants that kept the platform running. The enforcement action forced Grubhub to overhaul key business practices, and now the commission is cutting checks to the people the company allegedly harmed.
Payments will go out automatically. No one needs to file a claim. Most of the 640,038 eligible recipients will receive a check in the mail, while some will get their share through PayPal. The FTC has warned that checks must be cashed within 90 days and PayPal payments redeemed within 30 days, or the money goes unclaimed.
The federal complaint centered on three categories of misconduct. The FTC accused Grubhub of deceiving drivers about how much they would actually earn delivering food, a bait-and-switch that lured workers onto the platform with inflated expectations. The agency also alleged the company blocked diners from accessing their own accounts and funds without adequate explanation or recourse. And Grubhub listed restaurants on its platform without those businesses' knowledge or consent, a practice that put small operators' reputations on the line without giving them a say.
The FTC described the conduct in blunt terms:
"Deceiving drivers about how much money they would make delivering food, blocking diners from their accounts and funds, and unfairly and deceptively listing restaurants on its platform without their permission."
That is a company profiting at every level of its own supply chain, squeezing the drivers who do the work, the diners who pay the bills, and the restaurants whose food moves through the app. Each group trusted the platform to deal honestly. The FTC found otherwise.
Beyond the $23.8 million payout, Grubhub has been ordered to make operational changes. The company must now give users a way to dispute account blocks imposed for unclear reasons, an acknowledgment that the platform had been locking people out without explanation and without a path to challenge the decision. Grubhub must also obtain a restaurant's consent before listing it on the platform.
Both requirements sound like bare-minimum fair dealing. The fact that a federal enforcement action was necessary to impose them says something about how the company treated the people on the other side of every transaction.
The FTC has not publicly specified how much each individual will receive. With more than $23.8 million spread across 640,038 people, the average works out to roughly $37 per person, though actual amounts may vary depending on how the commission calculated individual harm. The agency has not clarified whether that 640,038 figure covers diners alone, drivers alone, or both groups combined.
Other questions remain open. The FTC has not announced a specific date when payments will begin arriving. It is also unclear whether the enforcement action constitutes a consent decree, a final court order, or some other resolution, and whether Grubhub admitted wrongdoing or settled without conceding the allegations.
What is clear: the money is coming automatically. Recipients do not need to file paperwork or respond to solicitations. Anyone who receives a call or email demanding personal information to "claim" a Grubhub payout should treat it as a scam.
The FTC's guidance on the payout was direct:
"Check recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. PayPal recipients should redeem their PayPal payments within 30 days."
Miss those windows, and the money disappears.
Gig-economy platforms have built enormous businesses by positioning themselves as neutral middlemen connecting buyers and sellers. When the middleman deceives both sides of the deal and pockets the difference, that is not innovation. It is the kind of conduct federal regulators exist to stop, and in this case, they did.