AI Accused of Inflating Gasoline Prices: Car Owners to Sue Major Gas Station Chains
In the USA, a group of consumers from California filed a proposed class-action lawsuit claiming that gas station operators, including Walmart, Marathon Petroleum, BP, and 7-Eleven, used an AI-based pricing tool to illegally inflate fuel prices in the state. This is stated in the lawsuit filed in federal court in Sacramento.
According to the complaint, companies jointly operating more than 1,700 gas stations across California used an algorithm from Kalibrate Fuel Systems, which automatically adjusted prices based on confidential data exchanged between system participants.
The lawsuit alleges that this tool raised gasoline prices by up to 22 cents per gallon and diesel fuel prices by up to 33 cents per gallon. This occurred amid some areas of the state already having fuel prices exceeding $7 per gallon during the US-Iran conflict. According to the lawsuit, each additional cent per gallon costs California drivers approximately $134 million annually.
This case is one of the first filed under California's AB 325 law, passed last year, which prohibits the use of joint pricing algorithms. According to Bloomberg, the plaintiffs are seeking damages under California antitrust laws for drivers who overpaid for fuel.
In May, California's Division of Petroleum Market Oversight—a regulatory body within the California Energy Commission—issued subpoenas to some gas station owners over inflated fuel prices.
The lawsuit is based on a legal concept that US regulators have been developing for several years. As reported by PYMNTS, the US Department of Justice's antitrust division has increased scrutiny of joint pricing platforms. Regulators believe that competitors who delegate pricing decisions to a single algorithm may create a so-called "hub-and-spoke conspiracy," where a central participant coordinates competitors' actions without direct contact between them.
Justice Department officials note that algorithmic systems generate large amounts of digital evidence—action logs, timestamps, and data trails—that may simplify rather than complicate proving violations.
The California case follows this logic. The plaintiffs do not claim that gas station operators personally agreed on price fixing. They assert that the joint AI-based tool did it on their behalf.
Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, and follow us on Facebook and Instagram to stay updated on the most important events.
