Slashdot Mirror
CenturyLink Fights Billing-Fraud Lawsuit By Claiming That It Has No Customers (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: CenturyLink is trying to force customers into arbitration in order to avoid a class-action lawsuit from subscribers who say they've been charged for services they didn't order. To do so, CenturyLink has come up with a surprising argument -- the company says it doesn't have any customers. While the customers sued CenturyLink itself, the company says the customers weren't actually customers of CenturyLink. Instead, CenturyLink says they were customers of 10 subsidiaries spread through the country. CenturyLink basically doesn't exist as a service provider -- according to a brief CenturyLink filed Monday.
"That sole defendant, CenturyLink, Inc., is a parent holding company that has no customers, provides no services, and engaged in none of the acts or transactions about which Plaintiffs complain," CenturyLink wrote. "There is no valid basis for Defendant to be a party in this Proceeding: Plaintiffs contracted with the Operating Companies to purchase, use, and pay for the services at issue, not with CenturyLink, Inc." CenturyLink says those operating companies should be able to intervene in the case and "enforce class-action waivers," which would force the customers to pursue their claims via arbitration instead of in a class-action lawsuit. By suing CenturyLink instead of the subsidiaries, "it may be that Plaintiffs are hoping to avoid the arbitration and class-action waiver provisions," CenturyLink wrote.
"That sole defendant, CenturyLink, Inc., is a parent holding company that has no customers, provides no services, and engaged in none of the acts or transactions about which Plaintiffs complain," CenturyLink wrote. "There is no valid basis for Defendant to be a party in this Proceeding: Plaintiffs contracted with the Operating Companies to purchase, use, and pay for the services at issue, not with CenturyLink, Inc." CenturyLink says those operating companies should be able to intervene in the case and "enforce class-action waivers," which would force the customers to pursue their claims via arbitration instead of in a class-action lawsuit. By suing CenturyLink instead of the subsidiaries, "it may be that Plaintiffs are hoping to avoid the arbitration and class-action waiver provisions," CenturyLink wrote.
In this case, all these corporations are the same person using different alibis. With human-like rights come human-like responsibilities.
I work at CenturyLink, don't come into our offices shooting! I had nothing to do with whatever it is our company does.
Now nearly 200 years later, the "corporations are people" crowd has steadily usurped the rights and liberties meant for real people in flesh and blood to these corporations. No criminal liability. Assets flow one way, Liabilities flow the other way, so no civil liability either. Perverse arguments like "spending money = speeach" and "corporations can have religious belief" has made mockery of our society.
We can't clone ourselves, and transfer liabilities to the clone and keep assets with us. We can not clone ourselves, transfer the salary earned by the clone to us, call it "carried interest" and pay lower taxes. But corporations can do all these and more.
Unless we limits the rights of the corporations commensurate with the liabilities they carry, we are doomed.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...
Its weird how Americans really get fucked when it comes to internet service or mobile data/cell service. Whats going on?
That would explain a lot regarding what they refer to as "customer service"...
#DeleteChrome
They do improper tax collection, too. They list X% tax = $Y value, however absolutely no line item or combination of line items with X% would equal $Y value. Even worse, is that they list multiple percentages for various taxes, and each would have a completely different and arbitrary base value if you calculated it out, none of which actually exist on the bill. I have countless other billing issues with them too. They wouldn't do shit over the phone, even after several months. I even went directly into one of their retail outlets, and what did the guy do? Jack shit. He just picked up his phone, dialed their normal 800 number, and handed the phone to me... He didn't even try to talk to his own people first.
Everybody in the C level should do TIME for this kind of garbage.
While I agree that it is asinine, prison time is a bit over the top.
in fact if they lose the suit then their PERSONAL assets should be forfeited and then split between the injured parties (with a reasonable cut for the lawyers).
Um, no. This would eliminate the entire idea behind corporations, limited liability companies, and basically the entire legal system behind corporate law. Doing so would put the entire legal system into chaos.
If that were to come to pass, then at some point everyone at a company could become culpable. I'd rather not be imprisoned for working at a company that someone somewhere did that I had no idea was even happening.
Who defines the reasonable cut for the lawyers? Generally they are the ones writing the laws. So the reasonable cut will likely be 95%.
Stand up in court, show the monthly bill. If it says CenturyLink on it, then it is CenturyLink. Pretty simple way to disprove this arguement.
The argument that they don't have customers is not nearly as clear as they suggest -- what matters is what is in the contract, not how they actually provide services through affiliates.
Read through, for example, the digial phone subscriber terms of service that contains the dispute resolution clause involved in those products.
Does it identify the corporate entity that is on the other side of the transaction? (hint: "In this agreement, we use the terms 'we,' 'us' or 'our' to mean CenturyLink.")
Does it mention any local or operating company? (hint: run a word search)
Does the notice section clarify any of this?
Does the agreement contain an "integration clause" that says that all other information or representations are to be disregarded? (hint: section 8. H.)
So who is to say that the CenturyLink holding company is not a party to the subscriber agreement? Who might have drafted the agreements (which apparently are identical no matter which operating company serves the customer)?
If you look at the basic agreements, only the High-Speed Internet and Internet Access Services Residential Terms and Conditions (updated in fall 2017l) actually specifies that the agreement for that product is with a particular affiliate providing services. Both the digital phone and TV service agreements do not. Earlier versions of the internet agreements may not have as well...
This isn't going to get them a quick dismissal without judicial findings of fact...
As Qwest (which purchased US West, an RBOC resulting from the AT&T break-up of the Reagan era) they were horrible. As Century Link they were worse. We employed two "billing specialists" at $60K/yr whose job it was to reconcile our telecommunications bills. We were a small regional ISP. Thousands of customers meant thousands of opportunities to get our bills wrong on unbundled network elements, ISDN, T-1, T-3, and DSL circuits. Qwest took advantage of "mis-billing as a business practice". Century Link continued the practice. Unrestrained capitalism will kill us all for that next favorable quarterly earnings call if necessary. That they use a binding arbitration clause to try to dodge their responsibilities tells us that it's time to put their C-level management, and probably most of their major investors, in prison for a couple of decades. Can't say that I'm surprised though....
Corporations should not be allowed to own other corporations.
One layer of obfuscation and liability protection is sufficient for legitimate businesses.
Prison time for corporate misconduct is not handed out enough.
Look at it like this... If I knock over a liquor store, and steal a couple hundred dollars, I'd go to jail for 20 years (give or take). I'd be a convicted felon, and I'd never get anything more than a minimum wage job. Basically, my life would be over.
If I'm a C-level executive and play fast/loose with the law, I can steal millions of dollars; from hundreds or thousands of people -- and unless I embarrass the establishment (like Madoff), I might get probation, or a few years of parole/supervised release.
I'm not a huge fan of China, but their stance on firing squads for this type of conduct sounds about right.
Which is likely part of their plan. To keep dragging this out until it doesn't matter or the people behind it give up. And considering that a lot of their customers are the elderly, the second might happen a lot quicker than the former.
If I'm a C-level executive and play fast/loose with the law, I can steal millions of dollars; from hundreds or thousands of people -- and unless I embarrass the establishment (like Madoff), I might get probation, or a few years of parole/supervised release.
Don't aim your sights too low! If you do it right . . . you will get a government bailout!
The C-Level folks at CenturyLink have already stashed their cash in the Cayman Islands. And they have their bags packed, in case any Feds do eventually come looking for them.
The trick about running a scam, is to know when to cut loose and bail out. That was Madoff's mistake . . . he got too greedy, and stayed around too long.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
The C level executives don't have anything to do with whatever half-cocked legal argument their team of lawyers decides to bring before the court. They only care about minimizing their exposure to the risk of a class action lawsuit. They don't really care how the lawyers do it so long as it works and aren't fit to judge for themselves the legal merit of their legal counsel.
Also, good luck actually pinning any of these activities on anyone at the C level. I agree that someone should be punished for this, but there's no guarantee the malfeasance was at the direct behest of an executive. It's just as likely that someone in the middle found a creative way to improve their numbers and climb the ladder as a result. The big bosses need not call for that kind of activity. It's sufficient to create an environment where that kind of behavior is encouraged and eventually someone lower and the ladder will do it out of their own self-interest which gets the bosses what they want without dirtying their hands directly.
>That sole defendant, CenturyLink, Inc., is a parent holding company that has no customers, provides no service...
Got that right.... as a former customer.
They claim they get the big bux because the buck stops with them. If they negligently let the legal team make whatever crazy move it wants without supervision, and compound their negligence by not correcting the situation after the fact, why should they be absolved?
As someone who was screwed over by CenturyLink charging me for services I never agreed to, then sending me to collections (I am not party to the lawsuit):
Their contracts, which I read carefully, all stated that they were with CenturyLink unambiguously. So, I don't see this line of argument ending well for them.
While I agree that it is asinine, prison time is a bit over the top.
No it isn't. Time and time again asshats like this use the "corporate card" to shield themselves from shit like this. They get away with all kinds of shit and laugh while hiding behind corporate laws and lawyers. It's more than time we stripped them of assets and send their ass to prison.
We are more than happy to lock up some kid that robs a liquor store for $50 bucks for 20 years. But IF we send one of these fuckers to prison its for 6 months even though they stole millions. Bull fuckign shit. lock them up and let them rot.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Also watch the documentary The Corporation
Nonexistent customers vs nonexistent service billed? Is that a lawyer joke?
If you as an individual Citizen are found to be participating in a scheme to file false invoices with Big Corp you most certainly can be criminally prosecuted and jailed - we have had two publicized cases along those lines in our metro area this year alone and one resulted in a 20-year sentence for the perp. But when Big Corp knowingly and deliberately changes customers' accounts without the customers' permission and bills them for products or services they did not order the corporate officers responsible for those actions should not face jail time because...? If the answer is "because corporation" then I'm sure you can see the moral hazard that arises. Generally C-level executives are very very concerned about moral hazard in circumstances where it might apply to their minimum wage workers but themselves... not so much?
I guess that's my question. The only anti-corporate people I know in America can barely hold onto a few senate seats (Bernie Sanders & Liz Warren). Whenever anyone gets serious about reigning this shit in a wedge issue divides the working class or people get scared somebody's gonna take all their money and gives it to the poors and they vote more pro corporate right wing party members in. Sometimes with D's next to their name, sometimes R's, but it's the same thing.
Unless you and everyone else reading this is gonna show up at primaries and start voting for left wing anti-corporate candidates then I think we're done here. And I've yet to find a way to make Americans interested in taking care of each other in large enough numbers to matter.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
how do you propose we do that? LLCs are the 20th century equivalent of the blood of kings.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Judge - let me see your bill ... Profit?
Customer - hands bill over that clearly says centurylink right at the top.
If you didn't order a service but were still charged for it then its true, you aren't a customer..
However as you aren't a customer, you also can't have agreed to any arbitration clauses since there was never any agreement or contract in place between you and the provider for the service they charged you for.
If a company charged you for a service and you were not a customer of that service and did not have an agreement in place to purchase that service, then that company committed fraud.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
While I agree that it is asinine, prison time is a bit over the top.
Why is prison time over the top?
Billing people for services they never subscribed to is FRAUD...
If an individual did this, they would be prosecuted and sentenced to jail time. Why should this be any different if a corporation does it?
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
The bosses are ultimately responsible for the actions of their employees, and could have stepped in at any time to put a stop to any activity taking place.
It's for a court to decide if they were complicit in the actions or unaware of it taking place. For minor crimes that the top level were not aware of perhaps you should only punish those directly responsible, but for any sufficiently large scale crimes the top level execs should either be punished for being complicit in the crimes, or punished for being criminally negligent if they were unaware of them.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
From the homepage on their website: For Business: "We provide products and services tailored to businesses of every size and need. Find your solutions here."
And for the home:
"Connections for your home and for your family
TV, Internet and phone are about more than simple communication. They enrich our lives, connect us to the world and put us in constant contact with the people and things that matter most. So, together, we're creating connections that go far beyond the technology we provide."
Sure sounds like they're trying to get customers. Hopefully, they'll lose most of 'em due to their simply awful business practices. This company is even worse than Comcast.
Google Fiber is now my ISP and has been for a few years. Prior to fiber building out in my area, Centurylink was my ISP.
If Centurylink has no customers, then why can I sown numerous payments to them for internet service.
Perhaps all of us that are, or were customers of Centurylink should file a class action lawsuit for wrongful billing and make them pay us back.
But IF we send one of these fuckers to prison its for 6 months even though they stole millions. Bull fuckign shit. lock them up and let them rot.
Yep, let's feed the prison industrial complex even more. I mean prison has solved everything. There's no more drug dealers, no more murders, nothing. Everyone is living in perfect harmony for fear of going to prison.
Or back in reality all we've achieved is to be number one in the world when it comes to citizen incarceration rate.
Prison is meaningless as both a punishment and as a deterrent. Prison used to be reserved for removing people from public who were incompatible with the public, but we now propose everyone who hurts someone else's feelings should go to prison.
For serial narcissists like the people involved in most of these white collar crimes prison is meaningless. What you need is a deterrent that hurts, such as knocking them down to a commoner level. Cripple them enough financially in a way that they won't be made homeless, but won't be able to dig themselves out of the lowest class of hole they can find, and then you may see something change. It's a system that is used in some places to great effect.
E.g. Speeding fines in Finland are tied to your income. For one person that resulted in a $103000 speeding fine for doing 15km over the limit. BASF became the kings of safety in the chemical world, not through threat of jail, but by building chemical plants around the homes and families of the plant manager.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If it is a class-action, there is a lead plaintiff and attorneys who stand to become very rich. They won't give up.
No kidding. I've been trying for years to get the bastards to provide me with the internet speed they advertise to me on a daily basis.
Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
The lawyers. Lawyers always win, because they have defined and refined and piled onto a system where they are necessary.
No matter what the outcome, lawyers win.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
The C level executives don't have anything to do with whatever half-cocked legal argument their team of lawyers decides to bring before the court. They only care about minimizing their exposure to the risk of a class action lawsuit. They don't really care how the lawyers do it so long as it works and aren't fit to judge for themselves the legal merit of their legal counsel.
They don't care WHAT the legal argument is, but they want it to be made. That's hardly having nothing to do with it.
Also, good luck actually pinning any of these activities on anyone at the C level. I agree that someone should be punished for this, but there's no guarantee the malfeasance was at the direct behest of an executive.
If we can have a felony murder rule (participants in a non-murder felony can be charged with murder for any death that occurs in the commission of the felony, regardless of whether they themselves had anything to do with the death), then we can certainly have a "buck stops with the CEO" law. The only problem is getting it passed.