Intoxalock: what people actually report
We do not take payment for placement, and we do not run a star rating we cannot defend. What follows is what we can verify.
What we can verify
- Network: 5,927 installation points across 48 states — 56% of the 10,531 we index, the largest network on file.
- Reach into smaller towns: present in 3,836 towns and cities. This matters more than the headline number, because you drive to a center every 30 to 60 days for calibration.
- How easily you can leave: 22% of its addresses also fit a competitor’s device — most of its shops are brand-exclusive, so switching usually means changing garage as well.
- Where you have no alternative: in 1,938 towns it is the only installer we found. Local monopoly is not a criticism of the company, but it does mean no second quote.
- Published pricing: no national price list; quotes are given per state and per center.
- Not available in: District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia.
How to read this
Every figure above is counted from our own index of installation points, rebuilt from the providers’ public center finders. It describes reach and structure — not how the company treats you when a test fails at 7am. Those two things are often unrelated, and anyone claiming to score them from the same data is guessing.
What has been put to Intoxalock by a regulator or a court
This is the part of a provider’s conduct that leaves a public, dated, checkable record. Forum posts do not. Each entry below names the legal entity involved, the forum, the docket where there is one, and how it ended — including the ones the company won, because a review that prints only the losses is an advert with the sign reversed.
Sales calls recorded without consent
Two California residents said their telephone conversations with Intoxalock sales representatives were recorded without their knowledge, which California's Invasion of Privacy Act does not permit without the consent of everyone on the call. The class covered anyone in the company's records with a California address or area code who spoke to a sales representative between 18 May 2021 and 8 February 2022.
Outcome. A settlement fund of $1,747,500 received final approval on 3 March 2025, with individual payments capped at $5,000. A settlement resolves the case without any finding of liability, and the company did not admit the claims.
Consumer Safety Technology, LLC, d/b/a Intoxalock · Haggerty v. Consumer Safety Technology, 22CV-01414 · ClassAction.org, case record and settlement documents · checked 2026-08-30
Calls that continued after do-not-call requests
The plaintiff says the company called his personal mobile sixty-six times from September 2023 onward, that he asked at least five times to be put on its internal do-not-call list, and that the calls continued after he added himself to the national Do Not Call Registry. The claims are brought under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act.
Outcome. The court denied the company's motion to dismiss on 10 May 2024, so the case proceeds. Nothing has been decided on the merits: at this stage these remain the plaintiff's allegations.
Consumer Safety Technology, LLC, d/b/a Intoxalock · Lopez v. Consumer Safety Technology, 8:24-cv-150 · Lopez v. Consumer Safety Technology, order on motion to dismiss · checked 2026-08-30
Mailings that looked like court documents
The Attorney General issued a cease-and-desist letter over direct mail sent to people who had pleaded to an OWI charge but had not yet been sentenced. The department said the mailer resembled a government-issued form and used wording that led recipients to believe the device was required of them. Complaints came from consumers, probation officers and judges, and the department said at least one person installed and paid for a device he never needed.
Outcome. The company rewrote the mailer — removing the instruction to call about "regaining your driver's license" and reformatting it so it no longer resembled a court document — and the Attorney General closed the investigation on 5 May 2023, seven weeks after the letter.
Consumer Safety Technology, LLC, d/b/a Intoxalock · Michigan Attorney General, press release · checked 2026-08-30
Location data collected by modem-equipped devices
Drivers in Minnesota's interlock program sued the state and its device vendors over devices that transmitted data in real time and, in doing so, generated location information. Against Intoxalock the drivers alleged consumer fraud, breach of contract and unjust enrichment.
Outcome. The court rejected those claims in an unpublished decision of 17 December 2018, which in Minnesota carries limited precedential weight. Separately, and while the case was running, the legislature amended the law so that program guidelines may not require manufacturers to collect location data at all.
Intoxalock · Carufel v. Minnesota Department of Public Safety, A18-0476 · Minnesota Court of Appeals, opinion A18-0476 · checked 2026-08-30
What we looked at, and what a blank section means
We searched published court decisions and federal dockets, state attorney general enforcement records and contemporaneous reporting on those cases. Where a provider has no entries below, it means we found nothing in those places — not that nothing exists. Small claims, arbitration and private complaints leave no public record at all, and the industry writes arbitration into its agreements, so a quiet record is partly a feature of how these contracts work.