# University of St. Thomas Data Incident Settlement

University of St. Thomas settled allegations that an unauthorized party accessed its network and certain files containing personal information, including credit card and bank account numbers, Social Security numbers, passports and licences, logins and passwords, home addresses, email addresses and phone numbers. University of St. Thomas denies any wrongdoing and the court made no finding of liability.

A settlement over a July 2025 data incident at the University of St. Thomas, in which files containing financial and identity information were allegedly accessed without authorization. Class Members can claim reimbursement, credit monitoring, or a flat cash payment.

| Field | Detail |
| --- | --- |
| Defendant | University of St. Thomas |
| Total settlement | Not publicly disclosed |
| Estimated payment | Every Class Member may claim reimbursement of up to $500.00 for ordinary losses, up to $4,500.00 for extraordinary losses and up to $100.00 for losses related to Sensitive Personal Information with supporting documentation; or three years of one-bureau credit monitoring with at least $1,000,000.00 in identity theft insurance; or, instead of those, an alternative cash payment of $50.00. |
| Claim deadline | 2026-09-28 |
| Who is eligible | People whose Private Information was potentially compromised as a result of the University of St. Thomas data incident and who were notified of it. |
| Proof required | The $50.00 alternative cash payment requires no documentation. Reimbursement claims require supporting documentation for costs incurred between July 25, 2025, and September 28, 2026. |
| Official claim site | https://ustdatasettlement.com/ |

To claim, follow the link to the official site and file there. We never file for you.

## Sources

Verified 2026-07-28.
- Official Settlement Website — Amy Crull v. University of St. Thomas (No. 2025-83309, 11th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas) (Simpluris, 2026) — https://ustdatasettlement.com/

---

This information is not a substitute for legal advice.