The class action Wang et al. v. Grubhub alleges that Grubhub and Seamless misled California customers between January 24, 2019 and January 12, 2026 by hiding or inflating costs—charging “delivery” and service fees that weren’t clearly disclosed, advertising “free delivery” for Grubhub+ members while other fees applied, and listing menu prices higher than restaurants’ own prices. Grubhub denies wrongdoing and the court has not ruled, but the parties agreed to a settlement that offers a $10 Grubhub site credit per valid claim (claim deadline May 12, 2026) with a $5 million cap on total credits; claimants must file to receive the credit, which is California-only, and Grubhub separately pays up to $1 million in attorneys’ fees plus incentive awards for the named plaintiffs. Beyond the payout, the settlement requires clearer pricing displays (separate line items for fees and taxes) and stops advertising “free delivery” where other fees still apply, shifting to “$0 delivery” with a note that other fees may apply. That change—alongside similar suits against other delivery platforms over markups, tipping, and hidden fees—reflects broader consumer-protection enforcement under California’s Unfair Competition, False Advertising, and consumer-rights statutes and could prompt industry-wide shifts toward greater fee transparency and regulatory scrutiny.