DIRECTV is facing its second major class action in as many months, this time alleging that the cable provider charges consumers with fraud alerts on their credit accounts for satellite TV that they never used or requested.
Lead plaintiff Brianna Greene says that DIRECTV opened an account using her credit, even though several credit bureaus had told the company that Greene had a fraud alert on her credit account. The company then “used an autodialer and prerecorded voice message to call plaintiff`s cell phone three days after it opened the account to ask whether or not the fraud alert was correct,” according to the suit.
When Greene received the phone call, she pressed “0” several times in an attempt to reach an operator – as instructed by DIRECTV`s automated prompts – but was unsuccessful.
Once Greene finally reached a human being, she was told that she would have to fill out a form in order to close her new account. After an account is activated, DIRECTV customers have a 15-day “grace period,” during which they can cancel at no cost.
The suit contends that “it is an unfair practice for DIRECTV to open accounts upon demand, particularly those where its credit check reveal [sic] a fraud alert, and then place the burden of closing the account on victims of fraud.”
The action is brought on behalf of all consumers who, within the past four years, received an autodial call from DIRECTV, despite having never given the company their phone numbers, and whose cell phones have either an Illinois, Wisconsin, or Indiana area code. Greene says that DIRECTV obtained her phone number from “a skip trace company or some other sort of directory.”
Washington case
Greene`s complaint comes less than a month after the Washington state attorney general sued DIRECTV for unconscionable sales practices.
In that suit, Rob McKenna says that DIRECTV draws in new consumers with ads for cheap service, only to surprise them with various hidden fees and other “gotchas” in the sales contract. Such gotchas include undisclosed financing requirements, cancellation fees, restrictive rebate terms, and attempts by DIRECTV to extend two-year contracts.
“Even if consumers used a magnifying glass, they still wouldn`t discover that the `good deal` they were promised came with potential expensive pitfalls,” McKenna said. He added that his office has received more complaints about DIRECTV – 375 in 2009 alone – than about any other company.
In fact, legal trouble seems to follow DIRECTV. The company has been named in at least 300 lawsuits over the past five years, a number of which were class actions. And the company isn`t especially popular with its customers, either; ConsumerAffairs.com has over 1,400 complaints about the company in its database.
Greene`s suit, which is being handled by Burke Law Offices LLC, of Chicago, alleges violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which restricts the use of “robocalls”; of the Truth in Lending Act; and of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act. The class seeks compensatory and punitive damages, along with attorneys` fees and costs.
Read DirecTV complaints.
