Controversies
Controversies tied to this brand in public sources. A listing is not a finding of fault.
Back to profile3 entries
2026
Chicago-area college tells Flock Safety to remove its cameras to protect immigrant students; company refuses
Issue disclosure
A controversy involving Flock Safety arose when a Chicago-area college asked the company to remove its cameras, citing the goal of protecting immigrant students. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Flock Safety refused to remove the cameras. The dispute centers on the college's stated concern for immigrant students and the company's decision not to comply with the removal request.
A Chicago-area college told Flock Safety to remove its cameras, citing the goal of protecting immigrant students, and the company refused to remove them, as reported by the Chicago Sun-Times.
Stated objective. To protect immigrant students
Company response
Clarification — Flock Safety
company says it was an error
Denial — Flock Safety
Flock stands by the accuracy and integrity of its technology and intends to vigorously defend itself in this litigation
Remediation — Flock Safety
Flock also said it would reduce the default setting for how long license-plate data is stored, from 30 days to seven, and give police departments more control over how their data is shared with other agencies.
Denial — Flock Safety
Source excerpt
To protect immigrant students, a Chicago-area college told Flock to remove its cameras. The company refused.
Flock Safety, whose cameras scan license plates across the country, continues to draw public anger, and now Senator Bernie Sanders wants the federal government out of the business altogether.
Despite its title, the bill doesn’t call out nine-year-old Flock in the text but rather covers any and all ALPR systems.
2026
Flock Safety defends its surveillance product amid dispute with Lowell
Company response
Flock Safety, a surveillance company, publicly defended its product amid a conflict framed as "Flock vs. Lowell." The available source is a headline only and does not describe the underlying allegations or details of the dispute. No further information about the parties, claims, or outcome is provided in the source.
Surveillance company Flock Safety publicly defended its product amid a conflict framed as 'Flock vs. Lowell'; the available source is a headline only and does not describe the underlying allegations or details of the dispute.
Source excerpt
Flock vs. Lowell: Surveillance company defends product
2026
Flock Safety faces disputes over contract cancellations and camera removal
Issue disclosure
A report described disputes involving Flock Safety customers seeking to end service and remove cameras. Plymouth officials said cameras remained installed while they awaited removal arrangements, and Dayton officials said two cameras were returned to service without authorization after the city suspended its program. Flock said it was coordinating with customers to remove equipment.
Company response
Clarification — Flock Safety
Flock Safety has responded to the disputes by saying it respects local governments' decisions to discontinue its services and is coordinating with affected customers to remove its equipment.
Remediation — Flock
We respect the city’s decision and are working with the customer to have the cameras removed.
Source excerpt
However, the city later discovered that two cameras had been placed back into service without authorization.
Flock Safety has responded to the disputes by saying it respects local governments' decisions to discontinue its services and is coordinating with affected customers to remove its equipment.
Flock Safety is facing mounting scrutiny after several local governments reported difficulties terminating their contracts and getting the company's surveillance cameras removed.