Slashdot Mirror


Courts Reject Tech Corporation Bans on Class Action Suits

Frosty Piss writes "Class action waivers included in cell phone companies' contracts with customers are invalid in Washington State because they violate the state's Consumer Protection Act, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday. Five plaintiffs accused Cingular of overcharging customers between $1 and $40 per month in roaming and hidden charges. Cingular had an arbitration clause that required individual arbitration and prohibited class action litigation or class action arbitration. From the article: 'In another class action-related ruling issued Thursday, the high court unanimously ruled in favor of a couple that filed a class action suit against America Online, Inc., claiming the Internet provider created and charged them for secondary membership accounts that they didn't want.'"

26 of 102 comments (clear)

  1. Taking advantage of the non-tech savvy? by shutupkevin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Too many companies nowadays are taking advantage of the vast amount of population that pay money for a service that they don't completely understand. How many people actually know what all of those surcharges on their cellular/telephone/isp bills are for? I hope this ruling occurs eventually in New York as well.

    1. Re:Taking advantage of the non-tech savvy? by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Too many companies nowadays are taking advantage of the vast amount of population that pay money for a service that they don't completely understand. How many people actually know what all of those surcharges on their cellular/telephone/isp bills are for? I hope this ruling occurs eventually in New York as well.

      This is why I believe companies should be required to show 'total costs' in any marketing and documentation. Total costs would be described as what the customer pays at the end of the month if they don't knowingly opt-in to extras or stay within the bounds of the base package. Extras whether they are roaming, extra functionality and on should also be described in a manner where the customer does not need a degree to understand. For example:
          - base fee, including 200 minutes: $20 (all taxes, and made up taxes are included in this figure)
          - additional per minutes charge $0.10, I used 10 extra
          - roaming charge per minute $0.20, for area X, I used 0
          - total fee would be $21.00
      Easy to calculate, easy to discuss. If the companies billing systems are so complicated that even your support can't understand, then there is an issue.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    2. Re:Taking advantage of the non-tech savvy? by cecille · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not even the sales people understand. I just signed on to a plan with Bell. They had recently re-done their plans and now they were something like "15 dollars less", but now include a "network fee" of...you guessed it...round about the amount the plan decreased by in the first place. I could not for the life of me get the sales person to actually explain what the hell I was paying for in the contract fee if it wasn't actually to use their network for my cell service. IE...if I don't pay the "network fee" then I don't have cell service at all. The contract fee is therefore for nothing.

      --
      ...no two people are not on fire.
  2. Just a reminder... by DogDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just a reminder, kids. Just because you put something in a "contract" doesn't make it legal or enforceable. No need to get your panties in a bunch over the fine print in cell phone contracts, EULA's, etc.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Just a reminder... by pintpusher · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The better thing to remember is: It's a contract, and you can negotiate it before you sign it. I had an interesting adventure with a major corp recently. I was being courted by a major food service vendor who has recently moved into this area. I'm a pretty small fish -- maybe $1,000 a week in wholesale grocery supplies, but their sales rep has a couple major accounts on either side of me and it was easy for him to stop in. So we went through the whole deal of pricing everything out and determined that we could save a reasonable amount by using this company.

      So out comes the "application". I've been in the restaurant business for a few years now and have some idea of what standard practice is... anyway, I decided I didn't want credit. I wanted to just purchase COD. It's really easier in the long run in many ways -- less book-keeping, easier to budget money, instant credit, no messing with chargebacks or mystery invoices etc etc etc. So I start reading through the various agreements they expect me to sign. I looked at the salesman and said "you know I want COD only?" He agreed it was ridiculous. So I told him I'd mark it up over the next few days and then he could pick it up.

      So there were three agreements. One was a personal guarantee, which I never sign, ever. So a big line through that one. The second was a statement about my legal right to purchase wholesale in the state (no biggie, standard stuff and a tax id number). The third was essentially a credit app with some extra stuff thrown in relating to how to deal with bad product and so forth. So I start lining through stuff that doesn't apply to COD, stuff that puts all of my company's assets on the line for groceries. I rewrite a couple of other bits to make them more palatable to me, like fixing the court of jurisdiction to be my state, not theirs; changing the part about 3 days written notice by certified return receipt if we get bad product; etc etc. When it was all done, I'd probably struck a good 60% of the contract and rewritten another 20%, and then I signed it.

      About two weeks go by and we hear from the salesman (you should have seen the look on his face when he picked the thing up). The credit department (I don't want credit) had denied my application, not because of all the stuff in the contract that I'd marked up, but because I hadn't signed the personal guarantee. go figure. So all I can assume is they know their contract is onerous and were willing to let it go so long as I put all my personal crap on the line for a COD account. needless to say, I'm still using my old provider who loves me and gets paid every week for seven years...

      I think I'll write a "service provider agreement" and make anyone who wants to provide me a service sign it.... hmmm... that might be fun ;)
      --
      man, I feel like mold.
    2. Re:Just a reminder... by Nimey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I tend to sign those things because I've never seen that stuff enforced. If they don't agree to do something, and back it up with "the contract says so", I explain that they're going to ignore the contract, or not do business with me.


      Let us know how that works when you get sued for breach of contract. kthxbye.
      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    3. Re:Just a reminder... by nomadic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The credit department (I don't want credit) had denied my application, not because of all the stuff in the contract that I'd marked up, but because I hadn't signed the personal guarantee.

      They also probably decided that someone who was going to bother them over every single little aspect of a contract was probably more trouble than they were worth as a customer.

  3. Opposite decision just released today in Canada by shadowspar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Interestingly, the Supreme Court of Canada just released a decision that cuts the opposite way. The Court upheld the "binding arbitration" clauses that many companies put in their various contracts and agreements. This essentially shields them from class actions, since disputes have to go to arbitration instead of the courts.

    Since the matters involved in these cases actually took place, two provinces (Ontario and Quebec) have passed consumer protection laws (probably similar to Washington's) that protect consumers' ability to sue as a class. More jurisdictions need to step up to the plate and do the same.

    --

    There is a spellbook here; eat it? [ynq]

  4. Re:Do class action suits ever benefit the consumer by Gman14msu · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Well while class action suits are about benefiting the customers who were wronged, it`s also about punishing the companies that are misbehaving. While each individual consumer may not gain a great sum of money, the sum for the whole group may make the company change policies.

    This is not to mention the bad publicity that comes from losing a major class action suit. That's probably where the most harm comes to a company in the long run. In this case the adage that "Any publicity is good publicity" is probably wrong as these are already well known entities. Of course the only "public" that hears about this may only be slashdot, which has the numbers to take down a server, but probably not a Fortune 500.

  5. Re:Do class action suits ever benefit the consumer by camperslo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When the class gets paid in vouchers, the lawyers should be paid in vouchers.

  6. Unfortunately, this is very common by StandardCell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many contracts limit your ability to sue in a real court. They exist in everything from vehicle purchase contracts to fitness club contracts. The best thing consumers can do is to read the contracts, know their rights, reject contracts where such provisions can't be removed and tell the salespeople why this isn't acceptable.

    Any business that forces a customer into binding arbitration in a contract can't be trusted.

  7. Re:Anyone who gets overcharged for anything by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is either a fool or a coward.

    So, if you sign a cell phone contract, with a 14 day return policy, and on day 20 you get your bill and discover that they've overcharged you, you are a coward? Your options are basically:

    1. Cancel and pay the $175-$200 fee. Pay the overcharges or dispute them.
    2. Cancel and refuse to pay the $175-$200 fee. Buckle down for a fight over your credit report that you will probably lose and higher interest rates for the next seven years.
    3. Sue them.

    The game is tilted against the consumer in these scenarios. And I'm glad this ruling came down the way it did. It's not right that a contract can force you to give up your legal right to seek relief in court. And before any wise-ass comes back with "then don't sign it", try living with a cell phone, credit card, phone service, bank account, etc, etc, etc. They are all doing it!

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  8. They do, by making companies think twice by megaditto · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Class action lawsuits is one way to level the playing field and make companies care about their consumers by going after the only thing they understand: their bottom lines.

    After all, the companies have massive legal departments, paid 24/7 access to the Congress with the ability to (re)write the laws, they can drag out even the most solidly grounded lawsuits forever through the appeals process and wait for the victim to go bankrupt with all those legal and court fees. Any individual claims that do get through all the way are likely to be small, and will not impact the profit margins at all.

    Consequently, limiting class-action suits, along with court-awarded damages and restitution is a horrible idea; corporations would be able to literally kill thousands and still turn a profit!

    --
    Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
    1. Re:They do, by making companies think twice by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Consequently, limiting class-action suits, along with court-awarded damages and restitution is a horrible idea; corporations would be able to literally kill thousands and still turn a profit!

      How about my idea: punitive damages go to the federal government's general fund. That way, you can still punish corporations that don't understand motivations other than financial penalties, but remove all profit incentive from the equation. Would this have any drawbacks?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  9. Re:Do class action suits ever benefit the consumer by Kelbear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If I'm screwed out of a lot of money, I'd want compensation, but if I only have a small loss, I'm mostly interested in the company not benefitting from screwing me over. Having them stop is more important to me for those situations. But the time and cost to myself is too high for an individual.

    If the lawyer can shoulder the time and cost, I don't mind them getting a big payout, I wouldn't hope to get much back if I only lost like 50 bucks to the corporation. Hopefully they'll change their policy and that would still help me at least.

  10. Re:Do class action suits ever benefit the consumer by pintpusher · · Score: 4, Interesting

    On the one hand, class actions give the consumers the opportunity to build up enough clout to get noticed and possibly get the corp to change its behavior. Plaintiffs get added to the suit more or less automatically (you've seen those mailers that notify you that you're involved...). But the consumer rarely (in my experience) gets any real remuneration as a result. In this particular Cingular case, the plaintiffs could have added just about anybody who used their service during the specified period resulting in many thousands of plaintiffs in the class action. Cingular would probably have to pay out a few dollars per plaintiff in the form of future credits or something like that, plus legal fees. Of course, it may also allow them to weasel their way out of paying those who are no longer customers and various other bits of chicanery. But, by the nature of the class action, the handful of initial plaintiffs are able to leverage themselves into a position of reasonably significant power and actually get something done. (note that I haven't read the Cingular case, and my inferences above are based on my past experiences with class actions).

    On the other hand (bet you forgot about that first hand up there!) according the TFA, Cingular is willing to pay out the state's defined small-claims amount _or more_ in individual arbitration. That's $4,000 in Washington state. But they're banking on the idea that only a handful of individuals would bother. However, if the customers were actually pro-active about it and all those who were eligible for the class action took the initiative and entered arbitration for something that was provably wrong on the part of the corp, then the individual plaintiffs stand to gain significantly more on an individual basis while the corpp stand to lose significantly more.

    I would like to see some consumer advocacy group take a different approach in cases like these. I'd like to see them run a couple test arbitrations from their pool of original plaintiffs. If they are successful, use the information gathered as a result of this to assist additional plaintiffs in pursuing the same arbitration. They could put together packages of "how-to arbitrate the cingular over-charging thing" and send them to anyone who would have been eligible for the class action in the first place. Then you'd possibly see (provided the rewards were high enough) a significant number of well-armed plaintiffs entering arbitration at the same time. THat would likely have a real affect on a large corp. Nothing like having the legal dept suddenly swamped with massive number of arbitrations and then finding lots of well informed and prepared plaintiffs across the table from them. They may find themselves in a situation where they are _asking_ for a class action in violation of their own contract. That would be nice.

    --
    man, I feel like mold.
  11. Re:Do class action suits ever benefit the consumer by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Funny
    I'm fine with vouchers for everyone, as long as the vouchers are manufactured by the U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing.

    (The same goes for holiday gift certificates.)

  12. Re:Here in the UK by armanox · · Score: 2, Funny

    Of course not. UK citizens don't have rights to sign away *ducks and covers*

    --
    I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
  13. Re:Anyone who gets overcharged for anything by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Getting a cell phone without signing anything is trivial. I have had prepaid service for a year now

    Cool, I want to be cell-phone only so I don't have to deal with two numbers. Since it's my primary line, find me a pre-paid plan that's competitive. Counting nights and weekends I use about 2,500 - 3,000 minutes a month. On a post-paid plan of $39.99 (1k peak minutes/unlim n&w on T-Mobile) that's $0.013 a min for 3,000 minutes. Find me a pre-paid plan that's competitive with that.

    Oh, that's right, you can't, because the pre-paid offerings are purposefully crippled to make them useless for anything but light use.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  14. Re:Do class action suits ever benefit the consumer by Shajenko42 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The biggest complaint about the binding arbitration nonsense is that the company making the contract selects who will do the arbitration, and if they lose too many cases, fire them.

    In essence, you have to take up the complaint you have with the company with the company itself, and they're hardly unbiased. And I'm sure they would require that the arbitrations happen on their time table, one on one only, no lawyers allowed on the customer's side.

  15. Re:Anyone who gets overcharged for anything by Evilest+Doer · · Score: 4, Funny

    What are you, a 13 year old girl?
    No, he's an FBI agent. Don't you know anything about the internet?
    --
    I feel like death on a soda cracker.
  16. "Let the Market Decide!" by Evilest+Doer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actions like this show that the Great Holy Infallible Markets (TM) usually decide that eliminating your rights and stepping all over you generate the most profits. Especially if they can collude and set "industry standard" business practices. In fact, the few consumer protection laws that do exist are one of the few reasons that we really aren't a Corporate Dictatorship yet.

    --
    I feel like death on a soda cracker.
  17. Re:Do class action suits ever benefit the consumer by db32 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yeah...because all those class action lawsuits that SBC faced and lost over various sheisty practices over their early DSL offerings did SOOO much to help us all out get honest deals on DSL from AT&T now that they have all been allowed to remerge together. The people who "won" got all of a few bucks in a check that came almost a year later... I got more bang for my buck just griping at them up the chain for a few hours until I was eventually credited 6 months free DSL for their various screwups. Course it was 6 months of free crappy DSL that still didn't meet what I was promised, but at least it was free and lasted long enough for new competitors that weren't total screwups to enter the market. I have not had Telco direct provided DSL in 8 years because of that.

    --
    The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
  18. Re:Limiting class-action suits by Evilest+Doer · · Score: 2, Informative

    If the companies pass on too much of the settlement cost onto the consumers themselves, they will lose to their competitors.
    Thank you. This is what the corporate shills on television and radio don't understand (well, actually they probably understand, but they will never openly say it). A rise in taxes or an assessment of fines for illegal business practices does not translate into a direct increase in consumer costs since, in a healthy marketplace, competition will help set the price. What taxes and fines eat into to a much greater degree are the profits that the owners, CEO's, et cetera wind up being able to take home (which is why shills are hired in the first place).
    --
    I feel like death on a soda cracker.
  19. Re:Anyone who gets overcharged for anything by raftpeople · · Score: 2, Funny

    3000 minutes a month? WTF? You need to find more efficient ways to communicate

    My grandpa uses 0 minutes per month, man that guy is really efficient!

    Introduce your friends/coworkers to email, forums, wikis, SMS, etc

    My daughter uses SMS and is much more efficient than me because I use voice, here is an example of a speed comparison:

    Me speaking on cell phone to daughter: "I will pick you up in 10 minutes for soccer practice"
    Daughter texting: OK

    As you can see texting is clearly faster, now let's try a wiki example:

    Me speaking on cell phone to co-worker: "To boot the server, just flip the big red switch"
    Co-worker using wiki: {1 mouse click on hyperlink to "Booting the Server"}

    Again, no comparison. Let's make sure a forum is more efficient also:

    Me speaking on cell phone to friend: "Man I wish I knew if Sony had cut the price of the PS3, I really think I would buy one if they did, unfortunately I don't know and neither do you because we're both having this conversation on this dang cell phone!"
    Friend reading slashdot: "Sony Drops PS3 Price"

    It's pretty clear, the cell phone is probably one of the less efficient tools in our arsenal.

    Tune in next week for another in depth efficiency article titled "The Wheel - What Went Wrong?"

  20. Re:Anyone who gets overcharged for anything by raftpeople · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why are you making plans to pick her up for soccer practice 10 minutes ahead of time instead of a day or a week? When I had after school or weekend activities as a child I knew which parent would be taking me, and when, at least a few days in advance.

    Lets check and see how that would work:

    As I pick up daughter for soccer, she asks: "You're late, why didn't you call?"

    Me: "Traffic was bad but Sparr0 didn't want me to use my cell to make a voice call, so I used my cell and text'd my status to the Soccer Parents forum, I hoped you might have seen it there."

    Daughter: "I don't go to that forum"

    Me: "Dang"

    Daughter: "Who's Sparr0?"

    Me: "He's a poster on slashdot, seems to know all situations in which a cell phone might be used, turns out they just aren't efficient. Anyway, instead of me just telling you, why don't you check the the wiki I setup, it should explain everything."