Class Action Lawsuits against large corporations is very common in today’s economy, and more so with AT&T. Recently we have seen other class action lawsuit lawsuits against corporations like Wal-mart, Geico, and credit card companies for denying millions of customers their right to an unlimited data plan. If you have also received a complaint from an AT&T customer, or if you know someone who has, it is best to contact an experienced personal injury or class action attorney who can help you understand your legal rights, collect pertinent evidence, and decide how to proceed with your lawsuit. There are many resources you can find online to assist you with this important matter.
Class Action Lawsuit Against AT&T
In the last month we have seen yet another class-action lawsuit against AT&T, this time over its “unlimited” mobile phones & data plans. Here, a class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against AT&T. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit were among the millions of subscribers to AT&T’s “Unlimited Data” services who were routinely served with notices by AT&T that their data plan was being canceled due to an impending “special offer,” or new program, involving an extremely high percentage rate increase for all new accounts. The plaintiffs were also among the millions of customers who received an email from AT&T or one of its marketing messages, advising them that their current unlimited plans would be canceled due to the “terms and conditions” contained in the email. When the plaintiff and class action lawsuit was filed in 2021, the case was initially brought on by the plaintiff’s former AT&T subcontractor, now named defendant Autumn Audio Systems.
The complaint alleges that AT&T’s” Unlimited Data” programs are deceptive and misleading because they do not allow the customer to use any other cell phone service provider once the original account is closed. This class action lawsuit asserts that AT&T’s “Unlimited Data” plans and advertisements are deceptive and violate the Federal Trade Commission’s” fairer trade” rules. AT&T’s defense is that since most people already have cell phone service through a cellular company, there is no need to offer a contract with AT&T. However, most people already have cell phone contracts with AT&T anyway. So, whether AT&T’s defense is true or not, it certainly seems like a valid argument.
The plaintiffs further claim that AT&T employees were required to call set appointments and reports with customer support, and that those calls were scheduled during non-office hours, allowing AT&T to maintain uninterrupted contact with the plaintiffs. But, did AT&T employees call or schedule appointments on plaintiffs’ actual work or home phones? Were those calls “canceled” without notice? Were those calls made after the plaintiffs’ scheduled shift had already occurred? These are all legitimate issues for a Class Action Lawsuit.
If AT&T was allowed to continue lying about the number of phones used by its customers, and maintain that it did not provide customers with a legitimate billing cycle, that a class action lawsuit could potentially force the admission of the falsity of the company’s billing cycle. How could AT&T survive a class action lawsuit of this type? They could try to argue that the plaintiffs’ claims are simply not true; that their claims are merely “consistent with industry standards.” That may be true, but it does not erase the fact that AT&T did indeed maintain an unlimited data plan and did provide a billing cycle to its customers. In other words, the plaintiffs may have been able to maintain their position at the point of filing the lawsuit, if AT&T had provided a legitimate billing cycle.
There is a class action lawsuit currently seeking class action lawsuit recovery damages on behalf of a former AT&T customer who sustained substantial phone calls on her cell phone and was then placed on a “hold” status by AT&T while she was attempting to send and receive emergency messages to resolve the problem. The claim focuses on a contention that AT&T did not provide a legitimate billing cycle, a proper authorization to place the hold, and did not disclose the unlimited data plan and the additional fees associated with having an unlimited data plan. We’re also exploring the arbitration clause issue. We believe the arbitration clause, if properly worded, should compel AT&T to provide a contract or statement acknowledging that they cannot charge excessive fees to customers for minutes that are “on hold” by AT&T. That would be a substantial relief to the many customers who have spent all sorts of money trying to avoid their bills with AT&T.