U.S. residents are required to resolve most disputes with Instacart through binding individual arbitration administered by the AAA under its Consumer Arbitration Rules, rather than through court proceedings, subject to limited exceptions for small claims and intellectual property injunctive relief.
This analysis describes what Instacart's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
This provision requires U.S. residents to submit covered claims to binding arbitration on an individual basis, with the arbitrator holding exclusive authority to decide questions of arbitrability under the delegation clause, except for challenges to the class action waiver subsection. The Federal Arbitration Act governs interpretation and enforcement, preempting state arbitration laws to the extent permitted.
The agreement requires U.S. users to submit disputes to individual binding arbitration rather than court proceedings, with limited exceptions. Under this clause, users must also complete a 60-day informal dispute resolution process, including participation in an individual conference if requested, before initiating arbitration.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Mandatory Individual Arbitration (US) and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →Monitoring
Instacart has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"If you live in the United States and a dispute is not resolved under Section 7.1, you and Instacart agree to resolve it through binding arbitration instead of in court, except as provided in Section 7.2.3 (Exceptions). ... This Arbitration Agreement covers any dispute, controversy, or claim between you and Instacart (together, "Claims"), including Claims that arose or involve facts or conduct that occurred before the Effective Date of these Terms (other than Claims that were already filed in arbitration or court before the Effective Date), as well as any disputes that may arise after the termination of these Terms.— Excerpt from Instacart's Instacart Terms of Service (Superseded Capture)
1. REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: This provision is governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.), which the agreement states preempts state laws purporting to govern procedural or substantive aspects of arbitration. The FTC has authority over deceptive or unfair practices in consumer arbitration disclosures. State attorneys general in California, New York, and other states may evaluate enforceability under applicable consumer protection statutes. The delegation clause assigns arbitrability questions to the arbitrator, which may interact with state-level judicial review standards. 2. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The arbitration clause covers retrospective claims (pre-effective date conduct), post-termination disputes, and third-party disputes involving retailers, delivery personnel, and payment processors as intended third-party beneficiaries. The delegation clause removes threshold arbitrability challenges from courts except for class action waiver enforceability, which concentrates enforceability risk in a single judicial review point. 3. JURISDICTION FLAGS: California courts have historically scrutinized consumer arbitration clauses under unconscionability doctrine. The agreement applies Delaware law as a fallback where the FAA does not apply. The prohibition on attorney-submitted or mass opt-outs may face challenge in jurisdictions with consumer-friendly arbitration opt-out precedent. Canadian residents have separate arbitration provisions subject to provincial law. 4. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Enterprise clients or B2B users accessing the platform should assess whether the arbitration clause applies to their organizational account under the definition of 'you,' which includes organizations. The third-party beneficiary extension to retailers and logistics partners may affect indemnification and dispute allocation in vendor agreements. 5. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should review the 30-day opt-out window and individual opt-out submission requirement against user onboarding flows to ensure notice adequacy. The prohibition on attorney-submitted opt-outs and mass opt-outs should be evaluated against applicable state consumer protection notification standards. Prior arbitration agreements with users who did not opt out remain in effect per Section 7.4.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 3 platforms + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
This provision requires U.S. residents to submit covered claims to binding arbitration on an individual basis, with the arbitrator holding exclusive authority to decide questions of arbitrability under the delegation clause, except for challenges to the class action waiver subsection. The Federal Arbitration Act governs interpretation and enforcement, preempting state arbitration laws to the extent permitted.
The agreement requires U.S. users to submit disputes to individual binding arbitration rather than court proceedings, with limited exceptions. Under this clause, users must also complete a 60-day informal dispute resolution process, including participation in an individual conference if requested, before initiating arbitration.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Instacart.