Incidents gathered from public reporting around the world. Each one links to the articles it came from. None of it is a finding that anyone broke the law.
Reports people file about their own experience are not shown here and never will be without their agreement. Tell us what happened to you.
68 incidents closest to “LexisNexis Risk Solutions (RELX PLC subsidiary); exact US legal entity not verified” · matched on meaning · public reporting
The AI generated fabricated legal citations in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Durham Constabulary developed the Harm Assessment Risk Tool (HART), a machine learning algorithm that assesses the recidivism risk of offenders. The tool uses 34 data categories including criminal history, age, gender and two types of postcode, one sourced from Experian's Mosaic marketing segmentation system. Big Brother Watch alleges that using such commercial consumer behaviour data to inform custody decisions risks prejudice and disproportionate targeting of deprived neighbourhoods. The force has stated it is refreshing the model with an aim to remove one of the postcode predictors.
9 source articles · read the reporting →
Perplexity, an AI search engine, was sued by Dow Jones, the publisher of the Wall Street Journal and New York Post, on October 21, 2024. The lawsuit alleges that Perplexity's AI reproduces copyrighted articles without permission. Perplexity denies the allegations and states it responded to outreach from News Corp before the lawsuit was filed.
10 source articles · read the reporting →
The lawyer submitted AI-generated court documents containing false citations and quotes, harming his client's discrimination case.
1 source article · read the reporting →
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau took action against General Information Services and its affiliate e-Background-checks.com for failing to ensure the accuracy of employment background screening reports. The companies allegedly provided inaccurate criminal history information to employers, potentially affecting job applicants' eligibility and causing reputational harm. The CFPB ordered the companies to provide $10.5 million in relief to harmed consumers and pay a $2.5 million penalty.
10 source articles · read the reporting →
SenseNets Technology Ltd., a Shenzhen-based facial recognition company, left a database containing personal information of more than 2.5 million people publicly accessible without password protection for months. Dutch security researcher Victor Gevers and the GDI Foundation discovered the exposure in July and warned the company, which did not respond. The database was secured in February after the leak was reported, and the company is reported to be conducting an internal investigation. SenseNets has declined to comment publicly.
10 source articles · read the reporting →
A class action lawsuit alleges that UDR, Inc. used RealPage's YieldStar algorithmic pricing software to set rental rates and occupancy levels for its San Diego properties, in violation of a local ordinance. The suit claims the software relied on nonpublic competitor data, contributing to inflated rents and making housing less affordable. The lawsuit, filed in July 2026, seeks to represent all affected tenants. UDR has previously acknowledged using YieldStar as one tool among others in its decision-making.
1 source article · read the reporting →
On July 7, 2020, a security researcher discovered 2.5 million records containing personal and medical data of auto accident victims exposed online. The records, belonging to New York-based AI company Cense, included names, insurance policy numbers, claim numbers, and medical diagnosis notes. The data was labeled as staging data, possibly intended for temporary storage before being loaded into an AI system. After the researcher sent a responsible disclosure notice, Cense restricted public access to the database.
5 source articles · read the reporting →
The AI system generated fictitious legal citations in a summary judgment motion, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Momus Analytics, a legal technology company, uses machine learning to rank potential jurors for attorneys. Experts and researchers who reviewed the company's patent application say the algorithm relies on demographic characteristics such as race, which may violate constitutional prohibitions against discriminatory jury selection. The company claims its software has helped secure verdicts worth over $940 million, but did not respond to requests for comment.
9 source articles · read the reporting →
The AI generated fabricated legal citations that were included in a court filing, affecting the defendant's legal representation and the court's resources.
1 source article · read the reporting →
A study by the Universities of Padua, Udine and Carnegie Mellon found that Italian car insurers, including Genertel, Mps, Quixa and Con.Te, use birthplace and citizenship in pricing algorithms, charging some drivers over €1,000 more. The practice was ruled against in a 2018 decree involving Linear, but the study says it continues. The companies contacted denied or explained the findings.
8 source articles · read the reporting →
The Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) has filed a lawsuit in British Columbia Supreme Court against Caseway AI, alleging that the company's AI chatbot scraped approximately 3.5 million records from CanLII's database in bulk, violating its terms of service and copyright. CanLII claims it adds value to public court records through hyperlinks and corrections, which it says constitute protected copyrighted work. Caseway AI argues the information is public and accessible elsewhere, and that it did not use CanLII's enhancements. The lawsuit was settled in March 2026, with terms undisclosed.
5 source articles · read the reporting →
AI generated fabricated case law citations that were included in a court filing, potentially misleading the court in Russell v. Mells.
1 source article · read the reporting →
AI-hallucinated fake quotations were included in court filings submitted by counsel Elizabeth Tate, misleading the court.
1 source article · read the reporting →
AI-generated fake legal citations were included in a court filing, resulting in monetary sanctions against the attorney and his law firm.
1 source article · read the reporting →
The court imposed monetary sanctions and continuing legal education requirements on plaintiff's counsel for using AI-generated fake legal authorities in a court filing.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Lemonade, an insurance firm, posted a tweet claiming it uses AI to detect non-verbal cues in customer videos to deny claims. After backlash comparing the practice to phrenology, the company deleted the tweet and denied using AI to deny claims based on facial characteristics. Lemonade stated it uses facial recognition only to flag claims submitted under different identities, which are then reviewed by human investigators.
10 source articles · read the reporting →
AI generated hallucinated content in a court filing, affecting the legal process and the lawyers who filed it.
1 source article · read the reporting →
The AI-generated hallucinated citations in an expert report led to the exclusion of the expert and dismissal of the plaintiff's case.
1 source article · read the reporting →
The AI generated legal briefs containing fabricated citations, which were submitted to the Connecticut Supreme Court.
1 source article · read the reporting →
In August 2019, Crystal Marie and Eskias McDaniels, a Black couple, were denied a mortgage for a house in Charlotte, North Carolina, by loanDepot's automated underwriting algorithm. The algorithm rejected the application because Crystal Marie was a contractor, not a full-time employee, despite her high credit score and income. After the couple enlisted their real estate agent and employer to intervene, the lender reversed the decision and cleared them to close. The couple alleged that race played a role in the denial, which loanDepot denied.
10 source articles · read the reporting →
A class action complaint alleges that UnitedHealthcare and its subsidiary naviHealth deployed an artificial intelligence model to override treating physicians' determinations of medically necessary care for elderly Medicare Advantage patients. The complaint claims the AI model has a known 90% error rate and wrongfully denied patients care. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, seeks damages on behalf of the estates of two deceased patients and all others similarly situated.
10 source articles · read the reporting →
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action against IntelliVision Technologies Corp. for making false, misleading, or unsubstantiated claims about its AI-powered facial recognition software. The company allegedly claimed its software had one of the highest accuracy rates on the market and was free of gender or racial bias, without supporting evidence. The FTC also alleged that IntelliVision did not train its software on millions of faces as claimed, but on images of approximately 100,000 individuals. Under a proposed consent order, IntelliVision is prohibited from making such misrepresentations without competent and reliable testing.
9 source articles · read the reporting →
