Class Action -- Engadget Mobile

class action posts

Sprint details proposed $14 million ETF class action settlement

by Donald Melanson posted Aug 11th 2009 @ 3:04PM

It's a far cry from the $1.2 billion number that was bandied about at one point, but it looks like Sprint could still be taking a fairly sizable hit over those pesky early termination fees, at least if a proposed class action settlement plays out as it seems likely too. As Sprint itself announced today, the company's reached a $14 million settlement in the case, which will be placed in a common fund to be distributed accordingly to all the parties involved, which is where you come in (assuming you're a current of former Sprint, Nextel, or Sprint Nextel customer, that is). The short of it is that you can either sign on to the class action suit or opt out of it by hitting up the site linked below, and then you'll have to wait for the final approval hearing now scheduled for October 21st, which should actually settle the settlement once and for all. Details on the exact payout amounts to customers are buried in the documents on the settlement website, but it looks like the majority of customers will be receiving between $25 and $90 depending on their contract, plus some free bonus minutes.

Read - Sprint ETF Settlement website
Read - Sprint statement

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

Attention Sprint Treo 600 owners: you're owed $27.50

by Nilay Patel posted Jun 5th 2009 @ 3:54PM

Sure, Sprint and Palm are hoping the Pre turns the page on their relatively dark recent past, but karma's a bitch sometimes -- the other Palm news this week is that Sprint and Palm have settled a class-action lawsuit alleging the two companies misled customers into thinking there'd be WiFi and Bluetooth accessories for the Treo 600. Remember how crushed we all were when nothing ever hit the market? The pain was almost immeasurable -- unless you're a class-action settlement attorney, in which case you instinctively know anyone who bought a Sprint Treo 600 before October 27, 2004 is owed either a $20 Sprint service credit or a $27.50 credit to be used in Palm's online store. So, anyone still have their Treo 600 receipts from 2004? Yeah, we didn't think so.

[Via TamsPalm]

AT&T / Cingular class action gets go ahead from federal court

by Donald Melanson posted May 28th 2009 @ 1:33PM

This one goes back a little ways, but a U.S. District Court in Seattle has now given the go ahead to a class action lawsuit brought by former AT&T Wireless subscribers, who have complained that their service went downhill after the company was bought by Cingular and ultimately became the new AT&T. They're also not too happy that they were forced to pay to get new Cingular phones, and they're now asking that AT&T pay back all those extra charges, plus the usual damages, of course. For its part, AT&T isn't saying anything more than that it "respectfully" disagrees with the court's decision, and that it's now studying the ruling and considering its options.

AT&T retailer accused of pawning used Nokias as new

by Chris Ziegler posted Jul 16th 2008 @ 4:50PM

Notice that your freshly-purchased N75 smells more like a week-old head of cabbage than a bundle of brand new plastic, glue, and circuitry? That's gross, and no, we don't want to touch it (seriously, get that thing away from us). Turns out you may not be alone, though -- a new class-action suit filed in federal court alleges that CommClub, an independent retailer in California, was selling used Nokias for AT&T's network as brand new devices. For whatever reason, AT&T and Nokia are also named as defendants in the suit, though we're not sure exactly what role they played in CommClub's potentially nefarious dealings; at any rate, the class is looking to bring home some bacon for "injuries" suffered as a result of the bait-and-switch. You're going to go smell your N75 now, aren't you?

Verizon settles ETF class action suit for $21 million

by Donald Melanson posted Jul 12th 2008 @ 10:14PM

It's a far cry from the $1 billion potential pay-out we heard about initially, but it looks like Verizon will still be forking over a hefty chunk of cash as a result of that class action lawsuit over early termination fees -- $21 million, to be exact. Verizon still isn't about to admit to any wrong doing, however, with its spokesman saying simply that the suit "was a distraction," and that "this was a quick way to resolve it." As Dow Jones points out, the resolution of suits like these could well put a renewed focus on FCC Chairman Kevin Martin's efforts to curtail carriers' ability to charge ETF fees, which he hopes will eventually be governed by some national rules.

[Via Phone Scoop]

AT&T pays out for shady third-party charges

by Chris Ziegler posted Jun 5th 2008 @ 2:50PM

It's just the tip of the iceberg for the legal fallout from deceptive charges rung up by cellphone users hoping for a shot a free ringtones, wallpapers, and winning shots at contests simply by sending off a text message or an online form with their mobile number. Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint, and others are likely going to have to end up taking it on the chin after AT&T was taken to task -- first by the state of Florida and now by a series of class-action lawsuits that the carrier has chosen to settle (without admitting any wrongdoing in the process, for the record). It seems that customers will be able to file for refunds for such charges rung up between January 1, 2004, and May 30, 2008, for a total of up to three bill cycles' worth. AT&T will be sending out notifications of the settlement to its subscribers shortly; meanwhile, the lawyers involved in the suits collect a nice paycheck of $4.3 million -- a shade more than the average class action member is liable to get, we'd imagine.

[Via Phone Scoop]

Blast from the past: come get your Treo 600 / 650 settlement!

by Chris Ziegler posted Jan 24th 2008 @ 5:15PM

For most, the Treo 600 and 650 are old enough so that we don't really remember if we had troubles with 'em or not -- but apparently we did, and some owners are now entitled to a little chunk of cash to show for it. A class action lawsuit filed against Palm "claimed that the Treo 600 and Treo 650 smartphones had certain defects, failed at unacceptable rates, and that Palm made misrepresentations concerning the Treo 600 and Treo 650 smartphones," and Palm just decided to settle the whole tiff rather than take it to trial. This means that if you owned a Treo 600 or 650 that required two or more repairs and ended up purchasing a new device within a certain period, you get a little spending money -- or you're entitled to some free repair work, even if your Treo didn't require two or more trips to the shop. Naturally, there are some rules and regs involved -- this is a legal matter, after all -- so head on over to the site to figure out whether you're affected and how you can cash in.

[Thanks, Michael G.]

Apple, AT&T served with class action suit over iPhone locking practices

by Chris Ziegler posted Oct 10th 2007 @ 4:05PM

It goes without saying that if you sell enough of pretty much anything, you're going to eventually get someone riled up over a missing feature, a broken feature, or in this case, an unwanted feature -- and that someone might just happen to know a lawyer (or worse yet, be one). The latest class action suit against Apple and AT&T over the iPhone, filed in California, reads like a what's-what of complaints we've heard since before the phone was even released: the carrier shouldn't be charging an early termination fee for a phone that isn't subsidized, its international roaming plan is a total ripoff compared to a prepaid SIM that you'd normally buy to use with an unlocked handset, and most notably, that neither AT&T nor Apple have the right to purposefully damage (via firmware update) or void the warranty of a "lawfully" unlocked iPhone. All told, the suit rocks the two companies with a grand total of six counts -- alleging violations of a garden variety of state and federal laws -- each asking for between $200 and $600 million in cold, hard cash. Anyone who's bought an iPhone and "sustained damages" from it is entitled to participate, so put on your lawyerin' pants and enjoy the courtroom action.

[Thanks, Mark]

Apple hit with class-action antitrust lawsuit over bricked iPhones

by Joshua Topolsky posted Oct 8th 2007 @ 4:44PM

Apple has obviously made some enemies over this whole iPhone firmware situation, and clearly not everyone wants to follow the straight-and-narrow when it comes to the company's factory-limited and locked device. Now, at least one California resident named Timothy Smith has decided to bring the fight to the Cupertino monolith's doorstep -- and he showed up with lawyers. According to papers filed last week, the angry iPhone owner is suing Apple in hopes of barring the company from selling locked phones, and forcing the Mac-maker to provide warranty service for customers even if they've bricked their phones via third-party software -- though there seems to be no definitive evidence that Apple's update is the source of the brickings. The suit claims that, "Apple forced plaintiff and the class members to pay substantially more for the iPhone and cell phone service than they would have paid in a competitive marketplace either for the iPhone or for AT&T's cell phone service," and that the company, "Acted in defiance and without sufficient consideration of consumers' rights to unlock their iPhones because it knew that the probable result of its update would be to render unlocked iPhones inoperable." The lawyers in the case have set up a website where owners can join in on the suit -- so if you're feeling slighted, maybe they can help.

Canadian court certifies class-action lawsuit against carriers

by Michael Caputo posted Oct 6th 2007 @ 8:05PM

If you're sick and tired of wireless carriers charging an arm and a leg for so-called "system access fees," you aren't alone. As wireless carriers up north rack in close to $800 million a year in said fees, they continue to brand the fees as required by the Canadian Radio-Television Commission -- even though the Government says that fees are no longer valid and don't need to be charged. Carriers were whacking Canadians with charges ranging from $6.95 for Rogers and Telus and up to $8.95 for Bell customers. Naturally, that kind of apparent overcharging can only lead to one thing: a class-action lawsuit. Get in while the gettin's good!

Apple and AT&T hit with third class action suit over iPhone battery

by Sean Cooper posted Aug 31st 2007 @ 12:04PM

Apple's lack of a roll-your-own battery replacement for the iPhone seems to be causing quite a stir with Apple and AT&T's legal departments as a third class action lawsuit has been thrown at them. Plaintiffs Zoltan Stiener and Ynez Stiener cite breach of contract, fraud, and violations of California law for not letting users know that the replacement costs can be upwards of $100 -- we're assuming this includes the cost of a rental replacement iPhone. Apple has settled in previous cases of this type -- well, in an iPod case at any rate -- so we'll have to wait and see how it all comes out before jumping on any class action bandwagons.

Good news: you can still sue AT&T

by Chris Ziegler posted Aug 23rd 2007 @ 12:58PM

If the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling holds up, that is. Basically, the court found that a clause in AT&T's (Cingular's at the time, actually) customer contract forcing customers to arbitrate instead of sue via class action was uncool -- "unconscionable under California law" was their exact wording, but you get the idea. We guess AT&T was looking to avoid having to make pesky public statements about lawsuits filed against it, and hey, who can blame 'em? Nice try, guys! [Warning: PDF link]

[Via Wired]

Wireless insurance class-action lawsuit settled

by Michael Caputo posted Feb 1st 2007 @ 3:01PM

We know that having your phone stolen or lost can be a traumatic experience, however if you subscribe to wireless insurance through your carrier it makes the process a little less painful. Except when your wireless insurance provider tells you that one dreaded word you don't want to hear: You're getting a "refurb." The problem occurs when people pay the $50.00 deductible and more often the cost of the refurbished phone is less than the deductible. Last week a federal judge approved an initial settlement between Asurion and Lock\line that affects approx 15 thousand customers and soon they will be receiving the details of their settlement. Signal Holdings, the other major cellphone insurance company, is waiting their trial date to be issued.

[Thanks, Sergio]

Lawsuit takes issue with T-Mobile's ETFs

by Chris Ziegler posted Nov 19th 2006 @ 5:36PM

You don't like early termination fees. We don't like early termination fees. In fact, with the exception of the carriers' bean counters, we can't think of anyone that likes 'em. But the fact of the matter is, a contract's a contract, and the ETF is the (relatively small, in the scheme of things) penance we pay for the right to break it. Be that as it may, a new class action suit brought against T-Mobile in an Idaho federal court claims that the nation's #4 carrier is breaking thirteen state consumer protection laws by charging customers $200 to wiggle out of their agreements. Specifically, the claim stems from the fact that T-Mobile doesn't make allowance for reducing the ETF based on the amount of time the user has been with the carrier, nor the "quality of service" they receive. For its part, T-Mobile isn't commenting on the suit, but we're guessing we can imagine the hand gesture they're doing their best to not display right about now. To the plaintiffs: can we recommend Sprint?

[Via The Wireless Report]

Motorola slapped with lawsuit over Bluetooth headsets

by Chris Ziegler posted Oct 23rd 2006 @ 3:01PM

We've personally had more trouble with headsets not being loud enough, but a California man has worked himself into a lather over "injury" allegedly suffered from using a Motorola Bluetooth headset at high volume. A lawsuit has been filed (naturally) against Moto on behalf of the suffering individual, seeking class action status with unspecified damages -- suggesting that many of us are victims of our own stupidity and are hard of hearing as a result. Ultimately, the issue is that the headsets can apparently reach 85-100 decibels, a volume that risks causing gradual hearing loss, and nothing in Motorola's safety documentation makes mention of the danger (someone actually reads that booklet?). Though we think this is a typically silly suit looking to shake the Motorola tree for some free goodies, we'll admittedly be the last to complain if a free H5 comes our way. Sorry, could you speak up a bit?

[Via The Inquirer]