Skip to main content
NOPE

NOPE · AI and people

AI incidents

Reports of AI-related harm and adverse experiences affecting people’s safety, wellbeing, rights and livelihoods. Explore what happened and the evidence available.

NOPE’s core concern is when AI communicates with a person, acts on their behalf, or depicts or impersonates them. The tracker also records consequential decisions, claims and privacy harms involving AI. Each case needs a described connection between AI use and the harm, including private information recorded into or disclosed to an AI service. Each account is reviewed for publication; claims may remain uncorroborated or disputed. How we review and count cases

Explore incidents Our scope and evidence

In this selection

Published cases
1
Countries with reported events
1
Located 1 of 1 cases · 0 unknown
Languages in checked sources
2
Recorded for 1 of 1 cases
1Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 0Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

These figures describe the cases collected by NOPE. Coverage varies with discovery, reporting and available evidence. They do not estimate how often AI-related harm occurs.

0cases with a recorded lawsuit outcome 0cases with a recorded regulatory response 0cases involving minors

Response counts currently use each case’s principal recorded outcome. Further proceedings may be described in its account.

When events happened

1 case without a known event year

Cases in this selection, counted once in their first known event year. A series may continue beyond that year. Reporting and collection dates are excluded. NOPE has searched recent events more thoroughly than earlier years, so bar heights also reflect collection effort.

No known event years in this selection.

More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

1 of 896 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
Event date unknownNorwayUnidentified AI writing tool

Bergen-area car dealer refused to consider buyer's complaint about faulty new car because it was AI-written, Motor reports

A car buyer living outside Bergen, Norway, who bought a new Jeep Avenger in January 2025, complained to the dealership after repeated warning messages about the brakes, ABS and stability control and more than 40 days at workshops, and asked to cancel the purchase. According to the Norwegian motoring magazine Motor, the dealer rejected the complaint, and one of the reasons it gave was that the complaint was written with AI: the manager wrote in an email that the dealer does not take AI-generated complaints into account because they only reflect the information put in. The buyer, who comes from Ukraine, says he used AI as an aid to understand nuances and phrase himself correctly because his Norwegian is limited, and calls it unfair to reject a factual complaint because of the tool he used. He has taken the case to the Norwegian Consumer Authority (Forbrukertilsynet). The dealer told Motor it had answered the customer and does not comment on ongoing customer cases. The date of the email is not given.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 24/10/2026

Cases may have several effects and sources. Mixed accounts qualify when they include a reported harm or adverse experience. People are counted within individual cases where sources support a number; we do not publish a collection-wide total of distinct people.

A source’s existence, the experience it reports and AI’s causal role are separate questions. A lawsuit records allegations unless a subsequent finding establishes them.

Methodology and corrections · Subscribe via RSS · Suggest a case or correction · Find support

Last dataset update: 24/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.