AT&T’s “Unlimited” Data Plans
Allegations: Deceptively promoting data plans as “unlimited” when they are actually subject to limitations
In July 2019, a class-action lawsuit was filed against AT&T for allegedly misleadingly representing that it does not share or sell data about customers when, according to the complaint, the company routinely provides information about the real-time location of customers to third parties without the customers’ consent and without legal authority. (Scott et al v. AT&T Inc. et al, Case No. 19-cv-4063, N. D. CA.)
For more of TINA.org’s coverage of AT&T, click here.
Allegations: Deceptively promoting data plans as “unlimited” when they are actually subject to limitations
Allegations: Falsely representing that it safeguards consumers’ personal information when it failed to do so and the data was breached
Allegations: Falsely advertising that phone and internet services are reliable and provide superior coverage and speed when the company failed to provide services for multiple weeks
Allegations: Misleadingly representing that AT&T is committed to protecting the environment and people when its cables are covered in toxic lead
Allegations: Misleadingly representing that it would safeguard consumers’ personal data when it failed to do so and there was a breach
Allegations: Misleadingly advertising monthly fees without disclosing certain fees
Allegations: Failing to adequately disclose when customers will be charged international roaming fees
July 2020: The case was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. as to the named plaintiff and When a complaint is dismissed without…
December 2016: This action was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled., the reasons for which have not been disclosed. May 2016: After the…
In June 2016, a class-action lawsuit was filed against AT&T for allegedly using bait and switch tactics by advertising calling plans on the packaging of GoPhones that AT&T does not…
March 2016: The lawsuit was dismissed because the summons was not returned with proof that it was served, as required by Massachusetts law. October 2015: A class-action lawsuit was filed…
AT&T says it’s not making a comparison to cable. NAD says differently.
TINA.org finds 95 percent of social media influencers previously put on notice by the FTC breaking the law.
Company’s puffery defense falls flat as NAD recommends changes to commercial.
Influencer gets FTC rules on disclosure wrong.
ISPs battle over who’s the real Pinocchio.