Privacy law only works
when someone enforces it.
Legislatures wrote the statutes. Regulators rarely have the bandwidth to act on individual websites. The private right of action exists precisely so that enforcement does not depend on an agency's budget. That is the gap we work in.
A tracker that leaks a patient's data is not a technicality.
When a medical office deploys session-replay or form-recording technology that captures a visitor's private form entries and sends them to a third party, that visitor did not consent, was not told, and cannot undo it. The law treats that as an interception because it is one.
We think operators should fix it, and that the people whose data was taken are entitled to a remedy. Most operators, once they see the evidence, agree. The ones who resolve fix their sites and move on. That is the outcome we are built to produce.
We are candid that this is enforcement, not charity. The people we represent have a real claim, and the operators we contact have real exposure. The portal exists to make resolving that faster and less adversarial than a lawsuit would be.
For the visitor
Their data was routed to third parties without consent. The statute gives them standing. We represent that interest and pursue a remedy.
For the operator
A fast, private, pre-litigation path that ends in a mutual release, plus the information needed to fix the underlying issue so it does not recur.
For the web
Every matter that resolves is a site that turns off non-consensual tracking. Enforcement changes behavior in a way that policy statements do not.
Received a letter?
Your access code opens the full case, with the evidence and your options.