Hi there! If you're new to the site, you may want to subscribe to the the feed.

Yesterday, we shared with you that the 9th Circuit in California ruled that the provision in AT&T’s contract that bars class action suits was unconscionable, and that such a case could proceed against them. Today, we bring you the case. It seems that some folks aren’t happy with the quality of service they’ve been getting since Cingular became AT&T. This is America, and in America if something sucks, you’re supposed to be able to get your money back!

We’re figuring that the plaintiffs are trying to get out of their AT&T service without paying an early termination fee, or are seeking to recoup some of the money they paid into an inferior service. We’re not sure of the exact terms, because most everything we’ve read on this focused on the arbitration/class action ruling.

It makes sense to do this class-action style. Let’s take a quick walk through the situation:

People are happy with Cingular. Yay!

AT&T buys Cingular. People express skepticism. AT&T assures, “Your service won’t change. We’re the good guy. You’ll continue to get everything you got with Cingular.”

Service gets crappier. Many people get pissed because they wanted out earlier, but were assured that what just did happen, wouldn’t happen.

Citizens band together to file a complaint against AT&T. AT&T says no, your contract says we have to take each one of you individually to arbitration, where we’ll win 80 percent of the time. Citizens appeal.

Seriously, isn’t this exactly what class action was made for? A group of citizens who have the same or a similar complaint against a common body. Yet, because class action suits so often results in big payouts, telecom companies think they can circumvent such cases by putting some unfathomable language in their contracts.

Good thing our contract disqualifies us from being sued for libel…

[RCR Wireless News]

Posted By : Stuart
Posted at : August 21st, 2007 - 9:00 am
Filed under : AT&T, Consumer Issues