Filed in California federal court by Sylvia Nixon of Los Angeles County, the suit claims Sprint deceived her into changing cell phone services in May then failed to deliver on alleged promises to cut her bill in half, pay termination fees she says cost her $1,500, and give her three $350 Visa gift cards.
Nixon claims that had she been aware that Sprint’s “sales tactics rely on falsities that have a tendency to mislead and deceive a reasonable customer,” she would not have changed carriers.
“Defendant misrepresented and falsely advertised to plaintiff and others similarly situated that it would provide these services when defendant had no intention of doing so,” the complaint states. Further, “Defendant’s conduct will continue to cause irreparable injury to consumers unless enjoined or restrained.”
According to statements from 2014 promoting Sprint’s service-change enticements, Sprint indicates that it offers Visa gift cards of up to $350 for each line switched in order to pay for termination fees.
Regarding the cards, the suit states that Sprint “failed to provide … all three $350 visa cards.” Sprint provided her with two, “and even charged the plaintiff for them.” While the complaint does not say how much Nixon paid, nor does it specify the degree to which Sprint failed to offer the promised rate, it does state that Nixon’s rate with Sprint was “well over fifty percent of what she had previously paid.”
The lawsuit seeks certification of a class of all Sprint customers who accepted the offers, an injunction on current practices, unspecified actual damages, attorneys' fees and punitive damages. Nixon is also asking the court to make Sprint “at its own cost, notify all class members of the unlawful and deceptive conduct therein,” and to force the company to amend its advertising.
“[T]he injury suffered by plaintiff and members of the class is not an injury which these consumers could reasonably have avoided,” the complaint states. “Plaintiff’s reliance upon defendant’s deceptive statements is reasonable due to the unequal bargaining powers of defendant and plaintiff. For the same reason, it is likely that defendant’s fraudulent business practice would deceive other members of the public.”
The case is Nixon v. Sprint Communications Inc., case number 2:17-cv-01149, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Central California. Nixon is represented by Todd M. Friedman of the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman PC.