fbpx

AT&T Wireless Data Throttling California Settlement

AT&T Mobility, LLC is choosing to settle a California class action brought by users of its unlimited wireless data plans. The complaint alleged that users were inadequately informed that the “unlimited” data included a throttling, suspension, or slowing of data speeds after use reached a certain threshold of use.  Read more

AT&T Wireless Name and Logo

Suddenlink Poor Services and No Payments Arkansas Class Action

This class action is brought by the city of Gurdon, Arkansas against Altice, Inc., which does business as Suddenlink Communications. The company’s website presents it as one of the largest broadband and video services providers in the US, but the complaint alleges it is not registered to do business in Arkansas and that it provides  Read more

AT&T Mobility Charges for Services Not Requested California Class Action

AT&T National Mobility Accounts, Inc. and AT&T Corporation are telecommunications companies that offer cell phone services in Georgia and New Jersey. The complaint for this class action alleges that the companies “knowingly and actively” charged customers for Internet Services Tech Support 360 services, when the customers had never bought or subscribed to those services, and  Read more

AT&T Name and Logo on Building

Charter Communications Spectrum Self-Installation Fee Class Action

When you pay a fee to a company, you normally expect to get something of value for it. The complaint for this class action alleges that Charter Communications, Inc. (CCI) charges a self-installation fee for its “free” modems and customer self-installation of its Spectrum Internet systems—in other words, for nothing of value.  Read more

Charter Communications Spectrum Van

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  Read more

Cox Communications Logo

County of Los Angeles Telephone Tax Settlement

The County of Los Angeles is putting up nearly $17 million to settle a class action alleging that it caused telephone service providers to collect taxes from customers on services that were not taxable. The complaint alleges that taxes should have been collected only on local services and on long distance services where charges varied  Read more

City of Long Beach, CA Telephone Tax Settlement

This settlement resolves a class action that alleges that the City of Long Beach, California required telephone service providers to collect more utility user taxes (UUTs) than it should have. The complaint claimed that taxes should have been collected only on local and long distance service where charges for calls varied by both time and  Read more

Avatel Technologies Force-Placed Insurance on Leased Equipment Class Action

Force-place insurance, also known as lender-placed insurance (LPI), is often found in connection with mortgages, when the borrower fails to maintain an adequate policy and the lender force-places one to protect against property losses. In this case, the insurance was placed on voice, data, or video equipment leased through financing, but the allegations the complaint  Read more

Charter Communications Massachusetts Cable Outage Settlement

Charter Communications is settling a class action alleging that it should have given customers credits for outages of cable services that lasted for twenty-four or more consecutive hours and that were caused by severe weather events, such as Hurricane Irene. This includes outages of cable TV, telephone, or Internet services, or a loss of electricity  Read more

AT&T Mobile Unfair and Monopolistic Phone Device Practices Class Action

In this pro se case, Plaintiff Roy A. Day claims that he bought a Nokia 1520 mobile device on June 7, 2014 and that he was told that AT&T Mobile had exclusive rights to provide services to that model of phone. He claims to have followed AT&T’s instructions to have the phone unlocked, but that  Read more