Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

CenturyLink Fights Billing-Fraud Lawsuit By Claiming That It Has No Customers (arstechnica.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the not-expected dept.

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.

29 of 198 comments (clear)

  1. Corporations are people too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In this case, all these corporations are the same person using different alibis. With human-like rights come human-like responsibilities.

    1. Re:Corporations are people too! by mysidia · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, that's not true. Limited liability. You can sue for anything you like, but the owners of a limited liability corporation are not going to lose a lawsuit.

      That all depends. Limited liability is not zero liability: the shareholders of a company that is sued might be required to pay back dividends or other payment they received of the company's profits to cover liability: particularly if it becomes deemed transfer in conjunction with fraudulent actions or a crime.

      There are situations where the courts can pierce the corporate veil and hold the parent company or investors responsible in excess of their investment; for example, especially, if the parent company was intermingling assets of their multiple subsidiaries, or if the parent or operating companies were significantly undercapitalized with major assets being transferred to the parent or vice-versa (eg a corporate structure that is an alter-ego of one or more of its owners organized only to act
        as a 'shield').

    2. Re: Corporations are people too! by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Informative

      IANAL but this is corporate law 101: The company responsible is always the company whose name and branding is on the materials that the company's customers interact with. There are many examples of case law confirming this, including a SCOTUS ruling.

      CenturyLink's name and branding was plastered all over the materials used to purchase the service. CenturyLink's branding was plastered all over the billing statements. This applies regardless of whether the materials are physical or online. Either CenturyLink's legal team is as stupid and lazy as CenturyLink's employees, or the c level executives didn't bother consulting with a lawyer at all. This isn't even a crapshoot, it's more like driving your car into a wall and expecting that it won't get damaged.

    3. Re:Corporations are people too! by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Only if CenturyLink actively manages their subsidiaries day-to-day operation do they pierce the veil (or whatever the term is) of the subsidiary arrangement. We have CenturyLink, nee Level 3, nee TW Telecom for our office fiber. The only communication I have that says CenturyLink is the announcement of the merger.

      That said, the announcement says:

      I am very excited to share with you that CenturyLink and Level 3 are now one combined company. This means that you now have access to one of the largest global networks with more than approximately 450,000 fiber route miles and approximately 360,000 international transport miles. Paired with our SDN solutions and IT services, CenturyLink now provides one of the most comprehensive digital service portfolios available today.

      It will be interesting to see where this goes.

    4. Re:Corporations are people too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This, exactly this, is why Move to Amend is so important.

      If we were at war, who in the corporation gets drafted?
      If someone is killed by a corporate product, who goes to jail for murder?
      If everyone's retirement funds go up in smoke, who pays them back?

      You cannot have the rights of being a person WITHOUT the responsibilities of being a person.
      I've incorporated myself as an LLC, and look forward to my spending spree before filing for reorg under chapter 11 multiple times.

    5. Re:Corporations are people too! by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Guess how many "unsafe" products would be released? Zero

      You are way to idealistic. I'm developing a product. If it is safe (99%) I'll make millions, otherwise (1%) it will kill people. It isn't easy to determine which case holds. So I have a choice: 99% chance of becoming a multimillionaire along with 1% chance of a prison sentence, or I can just drop it (and all the funds I've put in to development up to this point.) If I'm a psychopath, I'll leap at this chance. If I'm not, I'll likely fool myself into believing the 1% chance is really zero, and go for it.

      History abounds with cases where people have done unsafe things, even when it was their own lives at stake, when pressured by bosses or prospects of financial bounty or ruin.

      What you suggest might well help, but it won't magic away unsafe products.

      --
      Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
    6. Re: Corporations are people too! by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Also consider then...

      Centurylink's name and branding was on the bills...
      As per centurylink's arguments in court, the people who received the bills were NOT their customers.

      Thus fraud has clearly occurred, because people who are not customers of centurylink were billed for centurylink services.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  2. Limited Liability Corporations can do this. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This is the insidious things of "corporations are people" crowd. Back in 1820s when Limited Liability Corporation idea was proposed it met with severe resistance because, the question of "who will be criminally responsible for the criminal acts of a corporation?" was not answered. Remember, those days they had debtors prisons and the defaulters went to jail! They wanted owners of corporations to go to jail if they fail to repay their debts.

    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
    1. Re:Limited Liability Corporations can do this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      All these superhuman powers, combined with immortality, makes corporations our new Gods in the USA. Eventually we will all be kneeling to our new overlords. I do not mean that figuratively.

    2. Re:Limited Liability Corporations can do this. by gurps_npc · · Score: 2

      Can a corporation marry a woman? I have that legal right and your reasoning seems to apply.

      You have put forth the same flawed answer that others have used before. Just because people have a right does not mean that right extends to a group of them. That is a NEW idea proposed by conservatives only in the most recent time. [b]Most importantly, that right is not given to ALL organizations you join. The fact that I am a member of the PTA does not grant the head of the PTA the right to speak for me. Individuals would have to expressly grant that permission to that organization.[/b]

      Many rights are NOT transferable. As a citizen of the US, I have the right to vote. Corporations can not use my right to vote, despite the fact that they are made up entirely of US citizens.

      The government is totally within the constitutional law to declare that before any organization uses the right of free speech for something not expressly part of it's 'charter' (and that charter must be voted and approved by it's members before hand) of it's members, they must first:

      1) State what they are going to say
      2) State how they are going to say it
      3) State how much total they would like to spend on it
      4) Hold a vote on making that statement and get at least 51 of all possible votes (Not 51% of the votes counted, 51% of their total members)
      5) Then only give out a prorated amount of funds. That is, if they asked for 100 million, but got only 60% of the vote, spend only 60 million.

      Your current view is that if I join the the Bayridge Lottery Club their Chairman can speak for me about abortion.

      Our view is that they can not do that, anymore than they cast my vote in the presidential election or agree to get married.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  3. They'll get away with it too by bazmail · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its weird how Americans really get fucked when it comes to internet service or mobile data/cell service. Whats going on?

    1. Re:They'll get away with it too by suutar · · Score: 2

      So you're saying the real answer is just "greed and abuse of power", with no particular reference to an economic system?

    2. Re:They'll get away with it too by drew_kime · · Score: 3, Informative

      ... a government that has been bought and paid for by those big ass corporations.

      Government interference in a market is a socialism thing.

      The first is corporations controlling government. The second is government trying to control corporations. While you're right that the second would be closer to socialism, what actually exists is much closer to the first, which is plutocracy (or corporatocracy).

      --
      Nope, no sig
    3. Re:They'll get away with it too by mike.mondy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Capitalism. And a government that has been bought and paid for by those big ass corporations.

      You realize that those two things are diametrically opposed? I mean, you admit that one of the problems is the government. Government interference in a market is a socialism thing.

      No, not just socialism. Any form of government is going to have something to say about how markets work and what is or is not allowed.

      The topic wasn't government influence in a market so much as it was about corporations writing the rules. That's either corporatism aka facism or that's corruption - which is possible in socialism, democracy, or any other form of government.

    4. Re:They'll get away with it too by careysub · · Score: 2

      Capitalism. And a government that has been bought and paid for by those big ass corporations.

      You realize that those two things are diametrically opposed? I mean, you admit that one of the problems is the government. Government interference in a market is a socialism thing.

      It is a crony capitalism thing. Also, a fascism thing. Markets and trade do not exist without laws of some kind to regulate them. A "regulation free" economy is a fantasy - it has never existed (even ancient economies had regulations for fair weights and measures). Given that laws and regulations must exist, who writes the laws and enforces the regulations becomes a subject of political contention. When businesses, and the rich, are in a position to dictate how they are written and administered you get crony capitalism (fascism is an extreme form of this).

      There is absolutely no contradiction between government and business getting into a corrupt bed together. Happens all the time, if the political system permits it.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    5. Re:They'll get away with it too by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Looks like voting wasn't enough. Are you running yet?

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  4. No customers? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    That would explain a lot regarding what they refer to as "customer service"...

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  5. Ambiguity is usually resolved against the drafter by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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?

    If you want to provide notice to us either because this agreement requires it or
    because you have a matter you want to bring to our attention, you should notify us at the customer
    service telephone number on your bill or write us at 1801 California Street, Suite 900, Denver,
    Colorado 80202, Attn: Legal Department.

    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...

  6. A simple improvement. by Kaenneth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Corporations should not be allowed to own other corporations.

    One layer of obfuscation and liability protection is sufficient for legitimate businesses.

    1. Re:A simple improvement. by Target+Drone · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Operations in multiple states is an easy one, but there are regulatory barriers in many industries that require a firewall between groups which are difficult to achieve without separate corporate structures. It can also make it hard to spin off or acquire another line of business.

      One could argue that limiting the size and scope of how big and individual entity can get would be a good thing though.

  7. Re:Please, no violence! by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Informative

    You've just given me an idea! >:D

    no, only kidding. I had to look up who CenturyLink are - a US internet/telecoms service provider. How did the US telecoms industry evolve into the embodiment of most of the points on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist?

    They didn't; telcos have always operated this way, starting way back when Ma Bell still had a monopoly.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  8. Re:Time for a Judge with a Daedric Gavel by sjames · · Score: 3

    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?

  9. Re:Time for a Judge with a Daedric Gavel by jwhyche · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  10. Re:We the people... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

    Also watch the documentary The Corporation

  11. Lawyer joke? by manu0601 · · Score: 2

    Nonexistent customers vs nonexistent service billed? Is that a lawyer joke?

  12. What a ya gonna do about it? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    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/
  13. Fraud by Bert64 · · Score: 2

    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!
  14. Re:Time for a Judge with a Daedric Gavel by Bert64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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!
  15. Re:They're the ruling class by jwhyche · · Score: 2

    We used to behead kings....

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.