NIBCO Paid Leak Victims 25% First and Promised Up to 70% at the End. Seven Years After Approval, the Administrator Said an Estimated Last 45% Would Start Going Out by July 30, 2026 — Paid Only on Claims Filed by October 13, 2025

If you filed a valid claim in the NIBCO PEX settlement, the last payment is supposed to be on its way. The administrator’s notice dated July 15, 2026, still at the top of PexSystemSettlement.com on September 27, reads: “Supplemental payments are expected to be issued on a rolling basis beginning by July 30, 2026.” For claimants who already received a first check, the supplemental payment is estimated at 45% of the approved claim amount: “Combined with the initial distribution, which represented 25% of each approved claim amount, eligible Class Members will have received 70% of their approved claim, the maximum amount provided under the Settlement Agreement.” Claimants whose claim was approved but never paid are expected to get a single payment of the full 70%. The site does not say how many payments have gone out or when the rolling distribution ends; we found no claimant reports confirming amounts.

Anyone searching for the “nibco settlement” or the “nibco pex settlement” today is looking at the tail end of a program that ran for more than six years. The lawsuit, Kimberly Cole, et al. v. NIBCO, Inc., was filed in federal court in New Jersey on December 27, 2013. Homeowners alleged that NIBCO’s PEX tubing, the brass fittings that join it and the stainless steel clamps that hold them were defective and leaked, causing water damage. NIBCO denied it and admits no liability. Judge Freda L. Wolfson granted final approval on April 11, 2019 and entered final judgment the next day. An objector’s appeal was voluntarily dismissed, and the settlement’s Effective Date was May 16, 2019.

Why the second check came seven years later is built into the deal. It paid in two steps: 25% as each claim was approved, and a second, pro rata payment only “at the end of the Claim Period”, once the administrator knew how many claims there were. That period ended on May 16, 2025. In May 2025 the website estimated final payments “at the end of 2025 or early in 2026”; in December 2025 it said payments were expected by March 31, 2026, after a final round of deficiency notices and denial appeals; by April 2026 it had dropped the date: “Distribution dates will be posted on this website as soon as they are confirmed.” The July 15 notice was the first to name a start date.

The court file is not entirely quiet either. On June 30, 2026 David and Jennifer Murray, filed a motion asking the court to allow their class membership; NIBCO and the class representatives filed a response on July 16. In between, on July 1, the case was reassigned from Chief Judge Wolfson to Judge Zahid N. Quraishi. Neither filing is public on CourtListener and no ruling appears on the docket, so we cannot say what exactly they asked for.

The settlement class, in the agreement’s words, is “All Persons that own or have owned at any time since January 1, 2005, a residential or commercial structure in the United States that contains or contained NIBCO’s Tubing, Fittings, or Clamps” — together with spouses, co-owners, heirs, tenants, lenders and later buyers, and anyone entitled to claim on their behalf, such as a builder, plumber or insurer that paid for a leak. Three products count:

• Tubing: NIBCO PEX made with its 1006 formulation, including NIBCO NEXT-Pure, NIBCO DURA-PEX and NIBCO PEX. The website says the tubing was manufactured until 2012; the FAQ says it has not been sold since 2013.
• Fittings: ASTM F1807 yellow brass fittings for PEX. NIBCO stopped making them in 2015, though most were sold by the end of 2012.
• Clamps: NIBCO stainless steel clamps for PEX, with the same dates as the fittings.

Irrigation, radiant-heating, industrial, appliance and RV uses are excluded.

How do you know it is NIBCO? For anyone searching “nibco pipe settlement” after finding a leak, the FAQ gives three routes. First, look at the pipe itself: the covered tubing has a print stream with NIBCO’s brand and the “1006” designation, and “If you have flexible plastic tubing that is not stamped ‘1006,’ then that tubing is not part of this settlement.” The brass fittings are stamped “NIBCO F 1807”; yellow metal fittings stamped with interlocking ovals or with “DR” are not covered, and neither are plastic (poly) fittings. The clamps are marked NIBCO. The website posts photos of each marking. Second, ask the builder or plumber who installed the system whether their records show NIBCO PEX 1006 tubing, F1807 fittings or the clamps. Third, after a repair, the contractor’s records may say what came out.

Proof was not optional. The claim form required evidence that the property contains or contained the products — the leaked part itself, an inspection report, bills of sale, builder or plumbing records, a plumber’s or home inspector’s report, or photographs — and, for leaks after May 16, 2019, the failed section of tubing, fitting or clamp, or an explanation of why it was not available. The form was signed under penalty of perjury.

Who is not in it. Homes built by D.R. Horton, Inc.–Birmingham in 19 listed Alabama cities and by Continental Homes of Texas, L.P. in 12 listed Texas cities and areas were carved out, as were government entities and NIBCO itself; those homes had their own, smaller settlement, described in the last section. Owners who opted out by February 27, 2019 are listed in an appendix to the final approval order.

The settlement did not pay flat amounts. It reimbursed “Reasonably Proven Property Damage”: the unreimbursed costs of repairing or replacing the leaking section, repairing other property the water damaged, and bringing the structure and its contents back to their previous finish, as shown by receipts, invoices, checks, credit card statements or similar records. It excludes loss of use and loss of value, and anything someone else paid — the agreement says “there shall be no double recovery”, so money your homeowner’s insurer covered is not yours to claim again. The claimant also had to have taken reasonable steps to limit or stop the damage.

A leak counted as a Qualifying Leak if water escaped from covered tubing, a fitting or a clamp and caused damage — unless, under the wording amended before final approval, the administrator, NIBCO and class counsel all agreed it was “solely and exclusively” caused by something else, such as a nail through the pipe, improper installation or attachment, a malfunctioning pressure-reducing valve not made by NIBCO, or aging fixture sealant. A claimant turned down on that ground could appeal to the court-appointed Independent Engineering Consultant, Todd J. Menna of Element Materials Technology, whose decision is final; a claimant whose leak was blamed on someone else keeps the right to sue the installer.

What the nibco pex class action settlement paid, by type of claim:

The re-plumb option was for structures with three or more qualifying leaks, “each one occurring at a separate time after repair”, where re-plumbing would prevent further leaks. The agreement’s own example is a home with 13.5 fixtures, which yields an $8,100 re-plumb calculation. Sinks, showers, bathtubs and the water heater are full fixtures; dishwashers, toilets and icemaker lines count as half-fixtures. A structure paid for a re-plumb could file no further property damage claims.

Here is what the percentages mean in dollars, by our arithmetic:

The percentages apply to the approved amount, which can be lower than the amount claimed. The 45% figure is the administrator’s estimate — “Based on current claim volume” — not a court order.

NIBCO never had to put $43.5 million into an account at once. The agreement calls that figure the Gross Settlement Fund and caps NIBCO’s obligation there, but the money went in stages: $5 million within 30 days of preliminary approval, $17.5 million within five business days of the Effective Date, and afterwards top-ups whenever needed to keep at least $3 million in the escrow account throughout the claim period. Class counsel — Berger Montague PC and Sauder Schelkopf LLC — asked for fees of 29.885% of the $43.5 million, or $12,999,975, plus $1,254,768.94 in expenses, and for service awards of $10,000 per household for 11 plaintiff households and $2,500 for three more. The minute entry for the April 8, 2019 hearing records that the court granted the fee motion; we did not find the written fee order, so the exact award is not confirmed here. Administration costs also come out of the fund.

The sentence that matters most for claimants is paragraph 17 of the agreement: once all timely claims are paid, “any remaining funds in the Gross Settlement Fund but not paid into the Settlement Escrow Account shall remain with NIBCO and any funds remaining in the Settlement Escrow Account but not allocated to an Eligible Claimant will be returned to NIBCO”. Seventy percent is a ceiling, not a target: the second payment depends “on the claim rate and the amount remaining”. That the administrator now expects approved claimants to reach the full 70% means, by our reading, that claims did not use up the money available — and whatever remains after the last check goes back to NIBCO, not into a second round for claimants. The website does not say how many claims were approved or how much has been paid.

Cash the check. Paragraph 6 of the agreement says every check the administrator issues “shall remain valid for 180 days”. A check dated July 30, 2026 would expire around January 26, 2027, by our count; later checks expire later. Reissue on request was promised only during the claim period, which is over; after that, the agreement lets uncashed checks go to the state as unclaimed property without the usual waiting period. If a check expires or never arrives, call the administrator first, then check your state’s unclaimed-property office.

Missed the deadline? Each claim was due 150 days after the leak (for leaks before May 16, 2019, by October 13, 2019), and the agreement let the administrator extend that for good cause; an explanation under oath “reasonably demonstrating that the Claimant was precluded from submitting a Claim Form due to circumstances beyond the Claimant’s control” counts as good cause. Whether the administrator still applies that rule now that the claim period is over and final payments are being made, the documents do not say. Either way, the release took effect on May 16, 2019 and binds every class member who did not opt out, whether or not they ever filed. Personal-injury claims were never released.

A leak now? Leaks after May 16, 2025 are outside the settlement. The FAQ: “If you experience a leak after the Claim Period expires, then you should contact NIBCO.” Under paragraph 18 of the agreement such claims run under NIBCO’s Limited Warranty, which NIBCO contends does not cover design defects, requires notice of the leak and submission of the failed product, and limits recovery; the settlement did not extend any warranty. A dispute over a warranty claim NIBCO denies goes to the court-appointed Special Master, Ross Hart. The FAQ lists 888-446-4226 for questions about NIBCO products outside the settlement.

Not this case. The Alabama and Texas homes carved out of Cole were covered by a separate settlement, Matson v. NIBCO Inc. in the Western District of Texas together with Garrett v. NIBCO Inc., with a maximum fund of $7,650,000, 100-day claim windows and a re-plumb rate of $722.50 per fixture. Its website, AlabamaTexasPEXsettlement.com, gives May 16, 2025 as its claim form deadline. None of its figures apply to the $43.5 million settlement. Meadow v. NIBCO Inc., No. 3:15-cv-1124 in the Middle District of Tennessee, on the other hand, is part of the $43.5 million deal.

Checking a message about your payment. Type the address PexSystemSettlement.com yourself. The court-appointed administrator is Angeion Group: NIBCO PEX Settlement Administrator, P.O. Box 58086, Philadelphia, PA 19102 · 1-855-649-5968 · info@pexsystemsettlement.com. The settlement website says you do not have to pay class counsel.