Posted on 07/31/2008 7:39:27 PM PDT by posterchild
Californians fed up with being charged for ending their cell phone service prematurely won a major victory in a Bay Area court decision that concluded such fees violate state law.
In a preliminary ruling Monday, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Bonnie Sabraw said Sprint Nextel must pay California mobile-phone consumers $18.2 million as part of a class-action lawsuit challenging early termination fees.
Though the decision could be appealed, it's the first in the country to declare the fees illegal in a state and could affect other similar lawsuits, with broad implications for the nation's fast-growing legions of cell phone users.
The judge - who is overseeing several other suits against telecommunications companies that involve similar fees - also told the company to stop trying to collect $54.7 million from other customers who haven't yet paid the charges they were assessed. The suit said about 2 million Californians were assessed the fee.
Whether Sabraw's ruling will stand isn't clear. Experts say an appeal is likely, and the Federal Communications Commission is considering imposing a rule - backed by the wireless industry - which might decree that only federal authorities can regulate early termination fees.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
They tell you ahead of time that there are penalties for early termination so live with it. A contract is a contract.
i’m not a lawyer.
but it is a contract, you read, you sign. so how’s the judge negate that?
i have no problem with my cell phone provider. had the same co for years.
a friend of mine’s had her same co for 11 years.
if you use and like your cell phone, you’re going to stay with the same co.
How is this a judge’s job to decide if termination fees are “illegal?”
I haven’t read the ruling, but the media (and we) need to be very careful when describing the powers of judges.
You obviously never had a gun pointed at you when signing these things. < /S >
I suppose that “penalties for early withdrawal” will be next on their hit list.
Typical liberal mindset.. Agree to the terms, sign the paper, then sue when you want out. Why would one expect a liberal to keep a promise anyway?
I read somewhere that it violated a state law. I have no knowledge of how, but it is conceivable that the companies did something they were not allowed to do in offering those contracts.
My current cellphone was bought in 2002, with a two year contract ... my previous cellphone was bought in 1996, with a one year contract ....
When the 1996 cellphone failed I got the 2002 one, with a two year contract ... since that time I've gone to the Verizon store for spare batteries and such, and its always the same sales-pitch: "You need a new cellphone, this one is "old" the pitch would go ... obviously the Verizon vendor isn't interested in me getting a new cellphone as much as selling me a new 2 year contract ... so I just laughed and bought the battery or whatever accessory ...
Now my 2002 cellphone is *really* starting to fail ... the LCD display panel goes blank randomly, sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't ... gotta get a new phone :(
Oh well ... c'est la vie ..........
The only problem I see with it is if the provider delivers less than what was promised and still insists on the early termination fees.
Stay out of the store:)
I’ve had good luck with finding deals at amazon. You still have to buy a contract with a provider (if the phone is unlocked) but I’ve gotten better deals there than I would find in the stores. When I lived in a major city I had many choices for service providers with decent coverage but am more restricted in my small city (80K) now.
I’ll wait for the ruling that says if my stock purchases didn’t pan out the way I wanted them to I can get back my original investment plus commission.
Buy another phone on Ebay or Amazon.
It’s still better in the long run than the new contract, IMO.
Last time I looked at “reenlisting” so to speak, ATT wanted to charge me some BS activation fees for both phones on my plan. I’ve had the damn plan for 4 or 5 years and they want to charge *me* a fee for promising to stay with them 2 more years?
Nah, buy a phone somewhere else and keep the freedom of walking away anytime you like.
I know someone here can help you — this isn’t my field. But one of my kids bought a cell phone on eBay or some place like that and either switched out the sim card or had the company switch the phones — something that didn’t extend the contract. Anyone?
I think Sprint just recently switched to pro-rated early termination fees too.
I also agree that if you agree to the contract you should pay the fee.
Certainly try to get out of it though by whining :)
EXACTLY. I have had this problem (oddly enough, with Sprint). This was years ago, when rural service from some companies could be spotty. Let's just say that their "coverage map" was a crock of BS.
At the time, I traveled extensively, so this lack of coverage was a serious detriment to both my business and my safety. I'm talking probably 80% of that map was a lie.
After several months of excuse-making from them, I went through my final bill and deducted the cost of every dropped call (dozens and dozens); paid the balance and told them to shove it.
They hounded me for years to pay a several hundred dollar early termination fee...frankly, I took the hit on my credit report. I will NOT pay people who broke their terms of the contract...it's a matter of principle for me.
I had another company do the same thing to me...lying repeatedly about roaming charges.
I'm with a great company now, and have been for years...no liars...no problems.
I still cannot imagine why these people need a "contract." I don't have a "contract" with any other similar type of service; it's really ridiculous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.