Sprint Facing Consumer Fraud Class Action Lawsuit

- by

Santa Clara, CA: A consumer fraud class action lawsuit has been filed against Sprint alleging it deceives customers regarding savings in its “cut-your-cell-phone-bill-in-half” promotion, and fails to deliver as advertised.

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.



Legal Help

If you or a loved one has suffered similar damages or injuries, please click here to fill in our form and your complaint will be sent to a business frauds lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or obligation.

Reader Comments

Posted by
Dave Carlson
on
Tried to accept sprint offer for lower price on 4 lines but waa refused, sold me defective phone, cant use in non profit organization

Posted by
Danny Tuan Vu
on
How do I get on this law suit? I'm actually on the phone with Sprint this very moment for the 4th time to settle a false advertisement when they talked me into upgrading my phones and opened 3 additional lines on my account. Even after multiple calls, they RMA 3 phones and left the phones on the unauthorized lines open.

Posted by
Keith P
on
The new promotion where unlimited talk text and data for 100 for up to 5 lines, was a total scam as well. We were told if we bought 2 phones the others were a BOGO. It took months of having to call each month to get these credits on our lines. We have a family of 3 but waked away with 4 phones and 4 lines. One phone has never even been charged and turned on. We also just found out that after12 months on a 24 month contract, the additional lines were 30+ more a month. So I get to pay $60 more a month, and one line we were forced to take from Sprint, and again, the phone has never even been turned on.

It has become very clear that the stores and Sprint Corporate were not communicating. The stores just wanted to make a sell, and corporate does not care about what was said or sold to you. It was a bait and switch scheme to get new customers.

I agree with the above comments:

Sprint quotes in the store did not match my first SEVERAL bills.

Their coverage is no where near as good as what I had with AT & T.

No one seems to tell you the same thing when you talk to store reps and customer service.

In general, they are not a trustworthy company.

Posted by
Chuck
on
I have also been mislead by Sprint on numerous occasions.
The latest being when my wifes phone started malfunctioning. I have insurance, so I took it to Sprint to see if they could fix it.
I was told that it would cost $150 - $250 to fix or replace the phone ...and ... therefore I was better off buying a cheaper new phone.
So... like a fool, I bought the new phone for my wife. After not sleeping for a night, I did some research. --- Long story short, it turns out that because my phone didn't have water damage, (or ANY damage) it was FREE to have fixed or replaced.
Sprint then decided I could return the purchased phone and they would fix the old one.. when they couldn't fix the old one they decided to replace her old Note 4 with an inferior S6... when I complained, I was told I had to take it up with the insurance co. Never could get it resolved with them. The insurance co. would tell me it was sprint and sprint would say the opposite.
To make matters worse, when I returned the phone that I was talked into buying when I thought it was to expensive to fix the old one... I was supposed to get a credit for the money I spent on the returned phone. ... NOPE... not a penny credit yet and after a two hour phone call with them it doesn't look like they are going to even attempt to resolve this.

Posted by
Jill
on
Sprint had me sign a two year agreement, with an installment plan for purchasing my devices. My devices were supposed to be on an installment plan lease to buy program, and mine after the two years. They are now saying that this was a lease, that the devices were never on an installment plan (even though each statement showed a billing countdown to the last payment) and are not giving me my phones. They still want to charge me $20 over device (4 devices) per month, or have told me I can pay for early termination of the lease ($200 per device.) This is not what I signed up for.

Posted by
Carol Cook
on
Sprint deceived me as well regarding savings in its “cut-your-cell-phone-bill-in-half” promotion, and fails to deliver as advertised.

Sprint quotes in the store did not match my first bill.

Their coverage is no where near as good as what I had with AT & T.

No one seems to tell you the same thing when you talk to store reps and customer service.

In general, they are not a trustworthy company.

Add Your Comment on This Issue

Fields marked * are mandatory. Please read our comment guidelines before posting.

*Name:

Note: Your name will be published with your comment.

*Email Address:

Your email will only be used if a response is needed.

*Your Comment: