
TracFone Wireless
Allegations: Misrepresenting that it protects customers’ personal information when it failed to do so and there was a data breach in 2021
MacClelland et al. v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless and Verizon Communications Inc.
21-cv-8592, N.D. Cal.
(Nov. 2021)
Wireless service plans that let consumers pay their bills after they receive service
Falsely advertising lower monthly rates than consumers are actually charged by failing to include a monthly “administrative charge” in the advertised rates
Misrepresenting that the “administrative charge” is a tax or governmental fee when it is actually controlled by Verizon
Dismissed pursuant to the terms of a nationwide settlement in Esposito v. Verizon
Allegations: Misrepresenting that it protects customers’ personal information when it failed to do so and there was a data breach in 2021
Allegations: Misleadingly representing that Verizon is committed to protecting the environment and people when its cables are covered in toxic lead
Allegations: Falsely advertising that phones are unlocked
Allegations: Charging subscribers more than the advertised rate by adding an undisclosed fictitious fee to their monthly bills
Allegations: Falsely advertising monthly rates that do not include an “Administrative Charge”
Corporate doublespeak is as hard to decipher as the questionable claims in the ads themselves.
Find out which telecom companies are under scrutiny for misleading ads.
Not to be confused with “unlimited” data plans.
You may want to hit the mute button on these challenged cable claims.