Quantcast

California, FTC sue Frontier over spotty internet service, alleging unfair billing practices

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Monday, December 23, 2024

California, FTC sue Frontier over spotty internet service, alleging unfair billing practices

Lawsuits
Clarknicole

Clark

Frontier Communications is being sued again for allegedly failing to deliver the internet speed it promised customers while charging them for better, more expensive service than it was able to offer, according to media reports.

The Federal Trade Commission along with the states of Wisconsin, Arizona, California, Indiana, Michigan, and North Carolina filed suit in the Central District of California on May 19, alleging unfair billing practices and misrepresentation of DSL internet speeds.

“Since 2015, Frontier has settled with a number of states in cases involving similar allegations,” said Nicole Clark, an attorney, and CEO of Trellis Research. “While a settlement might feel like a success, it appears that these actions have done little to stop these types of deceptive practices in other regions and other markets.”

Frontier, which said it plans to defend itself, told KTLA the complaint has no merit and that its internet speeds have been clearly and accurately articulated, defined, and described in the company’s marketing materials and disclosures.

“It is common knowledge that few lawsuits ever make it all the way to trial. Most are settled out of court. In a similar case in Southern California, Time Warner Cable settled a lawsuit in an action filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court, which alleged the company provided slower-than-advertised internet speeds,” Clark said.

Counts specific to California include violations of the California Business and Professions Code Section 17500, which is the state's false advertising law, and 17200, the state's unfair competition law.

“Whenever a customer signs up for internet service, they are entering a written contract with a service provider,” Clark told the Southern California Record. “The outcome of this case will hinge on the exact wording of that agreement and the exact terms of the marketing materials. We do know, however, that state courts have generally ruled favorably with customers when it comes to internet service providers’ use of misleading claims about service speeds.”

The complaint alleges that Frontier violated the California Business and Professions Code § 17200 by engaging in business acts or practices that were unlawful, unfair, deceptive, or misleading and that Frontier violated California Business and Professions Code § 17500 by making untrue and/or misleading statements to the public.

“Frontier offers consumers multiple tiers of DSL and fiber-optic internet service. These tiers of service correspond to the maximum speed at which Frontier represents consumers can download data over Frontier’s network,” the complaint states.“Frontier generally charges consumers higher monthly rates for higher-speed tiers of service.”

For California consumers, the lawsuit seeks an injunction banning Frontier from engaging in unlawful, unfair, deceptive or misleading conduct, civil penalties, restitution and costs of the suit.

More News