NEWS    RECALLS    COMPLAINT FORM    SCAM ALERTS   RESOURCES  
Small Claims Guide   Class Actions   Lemon Laws   FAQ   Newsletters  
Share


Complain about a product or service

Automotive    Education    Employment    Electronics    Family    Finance    Health    Homeowners    Insurance    Pets    Shopping    Travel     Print This     Email This    



NEWS   Latest |  Archives |  Auto |  Cells, etc. |  Computers |  Financial |  Health |  Homeowners |  Parents |  Privacy |  Scams |  Seniors |  Travel

California Supreme Court OKs T-Mobile Class Action

Another chink in the Early Termination Fee armor





By Mark Huffman
ConsumerAffairs.com

October 11, 2007 


How to Avoid Early Termination Fees
Site Offers Cell Phone Contract Swapping
---
News
Verizon Wireless To Increase Termination Fees to $350
Verizon Wireless Revamps "Exclusive" Handset Deals
Sprint Text Messaging Tax Suit Dropped
Senate Committee Investigates Cell Phone Contracts
Senate Committee To Investigate Cell Phone Contracts
Judge Rules Sprint Termination Fees are Illegal
Verizon Pays $21 Million to Settle Termination Fee Lawsuit
Washington Power Grab May Be Price of Lower Cell Phone Termination Fees
U.S. Cellular Settles 'Free' Phone Complaint
Cell Phone Industry Losing Its Treasured Arbitration Clauses
Wireless Firms Face Pressure On Termination Fees
Verizon, FCC Cook Up Termination-Fee Plan
FCC Not Ready to Pry Open Wireless Networks
Sprint Removes Three Fees, Adds Two New Ones
Sprint, T-Mobile Prorate Termination Fees
AT&T Changes Contract Policy
California Supreme Court OKs T-Mobile Class Action
Verizon Wireless Changes Contract Policy
FCC, Congress May Limit Cable, Cell Phone Termination Fees
Cell Phone Consumers Win Court Victory
Text Messaging Charges Surprise Cell Phone Users
Cell Phone Customers Held Captive by Termination Fees
Poll Finds Cell Phone Users Want Stronger Consumer Protection
Michigan Challenges One-Sided Cell Phone Contracts
New York Considers Tough Cell Phone Consumer Protection Law
California to Try Again With Telecommunications Bill of Rights
California Suspends Wireless Bill of Rights
California Adopts Wireless Consumer Bill of Rights

A little-noted California court ruling might make a big impact on mobile telephone providers and their customers who want to get out of their contracts.

T-Mobile had appealed to the California Supreme Court to dismiss a lawsuit that challenged the company’s early termination fees. The lawsuit also seeks to block T-Mobile’s practice of “locking” its phones, so that they only work on its network.

Two lower courts had dismissed T-Mobile’s arguments, saying the lawsuit should be allowed to proceed. Without comment this week, the California high court agreed that the case should be heard.

Last year, Verizon Wireless agreed to pro rate its early termination fees and last week it agreed to allow customers to make changes in their service plan without extending the contract.

But other companies haven't followed Verizon's lead and, under pressure from consumers, both the Federal Communications Commission and Congress have raised the issue this year, warning that new rules and legislation may follow.

A 2005 study found that nearly half of U.S. cell phone customers would switch or consider switching cell phone service carriers to get a lower rate and better service if they didn't have to pay an early termination fee to dump their current provider.

In the T-Mobile case, the plaintiffs have asked the court to prevent T-Mobile from imposing the hefty early termination fee, saying it is levied against consumers who are seeking to end the contract just a few weeks early.

The same suit would also force T-Mobile to make transparent its software locks that prevent consumers from using the same phone if they switch to a new carrier.

Both consumers and industry groups will be watching closely as the case proceeds, since most major carriers have similar policies. At stake for the industry are lucrative licensing agreements between handset manufacturers and cell phone carriers.

A court ruling striking down, or at least modifying early termination agreements, could lead to consumers switching providers on a more active basis. It could continue a trend of a balance of power shift to consumers, which started with court-mandated rules that allow consumers to keep their same telephone number when they switch cell phone providers.

Same argument, different outcome

Perhaps most significant, T-Mobile found a formerly reliable argument this time fell on deaf ears.

In attacking the lawsuit, T-Mobile relied on the binding arbitration clause in its terms of service agreement, arguing its customers waived their right to sue when they signed the contract. A rejection or weakening of the use of binding arbitration clause could strengthen consumer clout in transactions ranging from cell phone contracts to automobile purchases.



Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

Share

Follow us on Twitter.

FREE CONSUMER NEWSLETTERS

The Daily Consumer
Afternoons M-F

Sign up now!


Consumer News & Alerts
Every Sunday

Sign up now!





CONSUMER NEWS

SAFETY RECALLS

Back to the top |

Advertisement


Custom Search
AUTOMOTIVE
• Dealers
• Manufacturers
• Service
• Extended Warranties
• Lemon Laws
• Recalls
• Tires
• Transporters

FAMILY
• Aging
• Children, Parenting
• Recalls
• Dating
• Education
• Entertainment
• Pets
• Weddings
FINANCE
• Annuities
• Banks
• Credit Cards
• Debt Collection
• Debt Counseling
• Insurance
• Investing
• Loans
• Mortgages
• Payday Loans
• Student Loans
• Tax Prep

HEALTH
• Doctors
• Drugs, Pharmacies
• Health Clubs
• Hearing Care
• Hospitals
• Nursing Homes
• Nutrition, Diets
• Vision Care
• Weight Loss
HOUSE & HOME
• Appliances
• Cookware
• Furniture
• Home Improvements
• Lawn & Garden
• Movers
• Pools & Spas
• Realtors, Rental Agents
• Recalls
• Utilities

ELECTRONICS
• Cable TV/DBS
• Cameras
• Cell Phones
• Computers
• Home Electronics
• Internet Access
• Local Phone Service
• Long Distance
• VoIP
SHOPPING
• In-Home
• Online
• Retail Stores
• Sporting Goods
• Supermarkets
• Telemarketers

TRAVEL
• Airlines
• Bus Lines
• Car Rental
• Cruises
• Hotels
• Travel Agents
• Trains

RESOURCES
• Class Actions
• Complaint Form
• Small Claims Guide
• Lemon Laws
CONSUMER NEWS
• Latest News
• Automotive
• Telecom
• Financial
• Health
• Homeowners
• Scams
• Seniors
• Travel
• More ...

RECALLS
• Automotive
• Children's Products
• Drugs
• Food
• Household Products
• Sporting Goods

ABOUT US
• FAQ
• Privacy Policy
• Advertise With Us
• Newsroom
• Syndication
• Terms of Use

Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice.  ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof. 

Copyright © 2003-2009 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc.  All Rights Reserved.    The contents of this site may not be republished, reprinted, rewritten or recirculated without written permission.