If you were affected, free legal review is available — no obligation.
Learn how to participate in the class action and what compensation you may be entitled to.
Join the Class Action →Use our verification tool to confirm your letter matches this official AG filing.
Verify My Notice LetterThis case file references a public filing made with the state filing in CA. This website is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by any state government agency.
AssetMark, Inc. was the subject of a data breach notification filed with the CA Attorney General. The AG filing was recorded on June 26, 2026. The breach or discovery date reported in the filing is May 15, 2026.
From the AG filing description
AssetMark, Inc. operates as a prominent turnkey asset management program (TAMP) and wealth management platform, providing comprehensive financial services, investment strategies, and administrative support to independent financial advisors and their high-net-worth clients. Because of its core operations, the firm routinely collects, processes, and stores an extensive volume of highly sensitive financial and personally identifiable information. This includes detailed investment portfolios, account balances, tax identification details, banking coordinates, and core identity records required to facilitate complex asset management, wealth transfer, and financial planning services on a national scale. In 2026, AssetMark, Inc. formally reported a major cybersecurity incident to the California Attorney General, alerting account holders and regulatory bodies to a significant breach of its digital network infrastructure. In the financial services sector, incidents of this magnitude typically involve sophisticated cyberattacks, such as unauthorized intrusions into centralized client databases, the compromise of third-party financial software vendors, or credential-harvesting schemes targeting administrative access points. These threat vectors allow malicious actors to bypass standard perimeter defenses and dwell undetected within corporate environments, exfiltrating vast repositories of confidential wealth management data before discovery. The exposure resulting from this security failure compromises multiple categories of sensitive consumer data, each carrying severe, long-term risks for affected individuals. The unauthorized disclosure of Social Security numbers, dates of birth, and full legal names provides identity thieves with the core components necessary to open fraudulent credit lines, apply for unauthorized loans, or execute tax refund fraud. Furthermore, the exposure of financial account numbers, routing details, and comprehensive investment histories places victims at immediate risk of targeted financial account takeover, fraudulent wire transfers, and sophisticated social engineering attacks designed to drain retirement accounts and investment portfolios. As a financial services institution entrusted with consumer wealth, AssetMark, Inc. was bound by stringent regulatory frameworks, including the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), and applicable state common law duties of care. These legal mandates require financial entities to implement robust administrative, technical, and physical safeguards—such as multi-factor authentication, end-to-end encryption, continuous network monitoring, and rigorous vendor risk management—to protect client data from unauthorized access. The occurrence of a data breach of this scale strongly indicates a failure to maintain these mandated security standards, potentially exposing the company to significant liability for negligence and statutory violations. Receiving an official data breach notification letter from AssetMark, Inc. serves as formal legal admission that your private financial and personal information was compromised due to inadequate corporate security. Under modern legal standards, affected individuals possess the legal standing to participate in class action litigation aimed at holding the company accountable for its security lapses and recovering compensation for time lost, mitigation costs, and the ongoing threat of identity theft. Our law firm is investigating potential claims on behalf of all impacted account holders, operating strictly on a contingency fee basis, meaning there are never any out-of-pocket costs or fees unless we successfully recover compensation on your behalf.
Under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), you may have a legal claim against AssetMark, Inc. if any of the following apply:
Based on the data types reported in this filing:
Your SSN is the master key to your identity. Once exposed, criminals can open new lines of credit, take out loans, or file taxes in your name.
Combined with a name and other leaked data, date of birth helps criminals pass identity verification questions at banks and government agencies.
Common categories of compensation in data breach class actions
Courts recognize that the time spent monitoring accounts, placing credit freezes, and dealing with the aftermath of a breach has real economic value. This category of damages is recoverable even without direct financial loss.
Professional credit monitoring services cost $10–$40 per month. Identity theft restoration services, if needed, can cost hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars. Courts have awarded these costs as direct damages in SSN breach cases.
Direct financial losses resulting from the breach — unauthorized charges, fraudulent transfers, or fees incurred through fraud — are recoverable as compensatory damages. Banks may reverse some charges; a class action recovers the remainder and associated costs.
Data breach victims regularly report anxiety, loss of sleep, and ongoing fear of identity theft. These non-economic harms are cognizable injuries in data breach litigation, particularly in cases involving SSN or medical record exposure.
Note: an attorney general breach filing does not by itself establish a settlement fund, a payment amount, or a claim deadline. If an official settlement notice is later issued, rely on that notice for payment details and deadlines.
No. Under California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and federal law, the unauthorized exposure of your personal data — regardless of whether it has been actively misused — can be sufficient grounds for a claim. The breach itself is the injury.
Nothing. The Law Office of David S. Harris handles data breach cases on contingency — you pay zero upfront and owe nothing unless compensation is recovered.
Immediately place a free credit freeze at all three bureaus (Equifax, Experian, TransUnion). A freeze blocks new accounts from being opened in your name. Then file a complaint with the FTC at IdentityTheft.gov and contact our office — SSN exposure is one of the most serious breach types.
Banks may reverse fraudulent charges, but they are not obligated to compensate you for time lost, stress, or indirect damages. A class action claim against the breached company can recover those additional categories of harm.
State statutes of limitations for data breach claims typically run 2–4 years from the date of the breach or its discovery. Because this breach was recently disclosed, the window is open — but acting early preserves your options and strengthens the case.
Accepting free credit monitoring from AssetMark, Inc. does not waive your right to pursue legal action unless you signed a specific release waiving claims. In most cases, victims who accepted monitoring can still file.
Not necessarily. Many data breach victims are never notified directly. If your personal information was held by AssetMark, Inc. during the relevant period, you may still qualify even without receiving a letter. A free eligibility review can confirm your status.
Applicable State Law
This breach was reported under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which mandates notification and establishes your right to seek damages.
AssetMark, Inc. breach?
Free case review · No fee unless you win