If you have a dispute with Instacart, you must resolve it through private arbitration rather than in court, and you cannot join a class action lawsuit with other affected customers. You have a limited window to opt out of this requirement.
Consumer impact (what this means for users)
This provision eliminates your right to a jury trial and class action participation for any dispute with Instacart, including disputes that arose before you agreed to these specific Terms, forcing resolution through a private arbitration process that typically favors repeat corporate users.
What you can do
⚠️ These actions may provide transparency or partial mitigation but may not fully address the underlying issue. Effectiveness varies by jurisdiction and individual circumstances.
Opt Out of Arbitration
Within 30 days
Navigate to Section 17 of Instacart's Terms of Service to locate the arbitration opt-out procedure. Follow the specific opt-out instructions provided in that section within 30 days of agreeing to the Terms.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Mandatory Arbitration and Class Action Waiver and similar clauses.
This clause removes your right to sue Instacart in court or participate in collective legal action, which can make it impractical to pursue small individual claims and shields Instacart from large-scale consumer litigation.
View original clause language
SECTION 17 ('DISPUTES & ARBITRATION') OF THESE TERMS (THE 'ARBITRATION AGREEMENT') PROVIDES THAT ANY CLAIMS THAT YOU AND INSTACART HAVE AGAINST EACH OTHER, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY CLAIMS THAT AROSE OR WERE ASSERTED BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE TERMS, WILL, WITH LIMITED EXCEPTIONS, BE SUBMITTED TO BINDING AND FINAL ARBITRATION. UNLESS YOU OPT OUT OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT, YOU WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED TO PURSUE CLAIMS AND SEEK RELIEF AGAINST INSTACART ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS, NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE ACTION OR PROCEEDING. TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, YOU ALSO WAIVE YOUR RIGHT TO SEEK RELIEF IN A COURT OF LAW AND TO HAVE A JURY TRIAL ON YOUR CLAIMS.
(1) REGULATORY FRAMEWORK: Implicates the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. §1 et seq.), California consumer arbitration unconscionability doctrine under Cal. Civ. Code §1670.5 (Discover Bank v. Superior Court, 36 Cal.4th 148), and FTC Act Section 5 (15 U.S.C. §45) regarding adequacy of notice and potential deceptive practices in pre-dispute mandatory arbitration clauses in consumer contracts. The retroactive application clause — covering claims 'that arose or were asserted before the effective date of these Terms' — presents additional enforceability risk under state contract law. (2)
🔒
Compliance intelligence locked
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Watcher: regulatory citations. Professional: full compliance memo.
Applicable agencies
FTC
The FTC has enforcement authority over unfair or deceptive practices in consumer contracts, including mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses that may limit consumer rights under FTC Act Section 5.
State Attorneys General, particularly in California, have authority to challenge mandatory arbitration clauses and class action waivers in consumer adhesion contracts under state UDAP and unconscionability doctrines.