Cox Communications Misrepresented Internet Speeds Class Action

Plaintiff David Ehrman has been paying a premium for faster home Internet connections to Cox Communications, Inc. “in reliance on [Cox’s] advertisements and related statements concerning the speed, functionality, and reliability” of their services. However, the complaint for this class action alleges that the advertised speeds of Cox’s connections are rarely if ever achieved by subscribers. The complaint claims Cox has committed common law fraud and violated California laws, such as its False Advertising Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

The class for this action is all consumers in California who have used Cox Communications home Internet services between June 22, 2014 and June 22, 2018.

Cox offers different levels of Internet services which are defined by their speeds, measured in “megabits per second” (mbps). For example, its “Essential 30” plan offers speeds of up to 30 mbps, while Ehrman’s chosen “Ultimate” plan promises speeds of up to 300 mbps.

Cox recommends its plans based on the number of devices the customer expects to connect to the Internet and the types of activities that will be performed. For example, if a customer may connect up to seven devices and stream videos of conduct video conference calls for work, Cox recommends the “Ultimate” plan.

The complaint says that Cox “strongly suggest[s] that consumers can expect to consistently achieve the advertised ‘up to’ speeds on all of their Internet-capable devices by describing the performance of the Internet services as ‘fast,’ ‘blazing fast,’ and ‘reliable’…” It claims that Cox also emphasizes the wireless capabilities of its plans and features ads showing wireless devices, such as smartphones, tablets, and laptops.

All of this, the complaint says, is “false and misleading” because Cox knows that no consumers will “reliably” achieve the advertised “up to” speeds and most consumers will never achieve them. The complaint claims that this is because the “up to” speeds “are based on the maximum potential for wired Internet connections used in an environment that is very different from how consumers typically use residential Internet services.”

According to the complaint, wireless services cannot achieve the advertised “up to” speeds and consumers using wireless devices will never come close to these speeds. It also accuses Cox of having “insufficient infrastructure, overcrowded bandwidth, and underperforming equipment…” The complaint claims that Cox does not tell consumers this and is therefore guilty of fraud and misrepresentation, as well as violations of California laws.
 

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer
Tags: Misrepresentations of Services Provided, Telecommunications