T-Mobile Sued for Breaking Lifetime Price Guarantees

[tCdemon]

Good! I was about to call them and whine!

I switch to T-Mobile from AT&T around April 2017...2 lines for $100 (all fees and taxes included)...I hope they get cleaned! Even if I don't see a dime...CLEAN!

I been shopping around since that text from them this year...the question is who do you want to give your money to because all three US carriers are around the same price $5 to $20 dollars difference.

 

[sk1985]

John Legere was somewhat like Steve Jobs in that he was looking to give more value to customers. T-Mobile's current CEO Mike Sievert is greedy and thus like Tim Cook in that he is looking to give less value to customers in order to maximize profits.

That's the trend across the board for every American ceo.

 

[btrach144]

John should have never left. T-Mobile is in shambles now.

So glad I left them.

 

[Mr. Jenkins]

John Legere was somewhat like Steve Jobs in that he was looking to give more value to customers. T-Mobile's current CEO Mike Sievert is greedy and thus like Tim Cook in that he is looking to give less value to customers in order to maximize profits.

Legere came at a time when T-Mobile was a bottom-tier company looking to grow, much like Steve Jobs with Apple.

T-Mobile had to take wild risks and bet big in the hopes of gaining customers, and that paid off. That, and a failed merger with AT&T that gave it a few billion in much needed cash and spectrum kicked off a good run that created actual competition in the mobile phone/service market. T-Mobile and Apple were the "insurgents" trying to beat the establishment. Now, T-Mobile is the establishment and they're acting like it. I think even John Legere would have adjusted to that new reality. They couldn't be the "Uncarrier" forever.

 

[Bryan Bowler]

I switched to to T-Mobile back then because they clearly said you’re price will never increase unless you change to a different plan….so, bring on the lawsuit!

 

[Bruh Bear]

Yeah, they’re a garbage company. I’ve had them before and tried them again recently. They increased my bill very even 2 months into my own and I immediately went back to Verizon. I don’t play games like this.

 

[DesiMunda]

“and additional damages for injuries suffered.”

How they got injury? lol

 

[H2SO4]

Can't wait for my $1.45 settlement check in 4 years!

I can see the humour or lack of it in your post but these companies need to be sued and stopped from using ridiculous terms like lifetime in their contracts or advertising.
These suits need to keep coming.

 

[Osxguy]

I wish we’d stop trusting corporations to actually do a good thing…

 

[Fidgetyrat]

A marketing statement is one thing. What does the actual service contract say?

That, right there, IS the bait and switch. Bait with marketing and in-store statements, switch with obscure changes to the contract and plans over time and fine print giving them an out.

Do I think this lawsuit will actually pan out? No.. They may settle to avoid the headache, but they did nothing illegal on paper outside of whispering promises and delivering something else on paper.

They did honor the free last month bill for me when I switched services due to this hike. USMobile has been way better and half the price.

 

[djphat2000]

This was a promise that should never have been made. If anyone expected 0% (or near) interest rates forever. I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. In this instance. It should have been sold as a price guarantee for say 4G or LTE. Now we are on 5G, and UCWAXFCEXZ whatever specs. It should be sold for that level of service. And say a specified amount of GB per month. So the price lock can be for that specific feature set (Speed/bandwidth/download/whatever). Then a new plan can be made for the new speeds/bandwidth/download/whatever without altering the old plan. With the caveat that when that standard goes away. So does the plan. So when 1G or 2G goes away. The plan has to change and even your phone in many cases. Since it's not supported anymore.

They could have sold it as lifetime for the functional level of the device. We will keep your price and features the same for as long as the device is supported. Either network level or manufacture or both end. If we still support the network, we can provide you service for a phone that is out of support at the same price. If we don't support the network, then you have to purchase a new device and the plan changes. Don't expect any device to last more than say 5-7 years and or the network to be available after that time. We recommend that after 4-5 years. You plan to trade your device in for a credit towards a new one. We will have comparable plans for new levels of service and devices that will be fair market value. And intend to provide service pricing for new devices/networks that are close to your previous plans pricing. Changes made to bandwidth or download, and faster speed networks will vary. So if you paid $50 a line for 4G/LTE at 10GB monthly data caps and unlimited text and talk. The new plan could be $50 for 5G UCX.... at 5GB or 7.5GB data cap and unlimited text and talk + world minutes (60 minutes anywhere on earth we have service). Or something like that.

Just state it clearly that if you change devices. So too can your plan if the new device supports a new network. Price lock to the device/network it supports. If you break or lose a phone and purchase the same model or supported network phone (different say in iOS to Android or vice/versa). You can stay on the same plan. But, if you go from a 4G only phone to a 5G phone, that will break your price lock and require a new plan. Blah blah blah.

 

[lkrupp]

Can't wait for my $1.45 settlement check in 4 years!

Which is precisely why class actions never benefit the user, just the lawyers. It’s a scam from the beginning.

 

[Apple_Robert]

From Arstechnica

"The lawsuit says that T-Mobile's mandatory arbitration clause should not apply because none of the proposed class representatives "received a copy of T-Mobile's Terms and Conditions indicating that there was a mandatory arbitration provision and class action waiver either when they signed up for their plans or via mail, email or text message at any time since." The four plaintiffs say they opted out of the mandatory arbitration provision and class action waiver before filing the lawsuit."

"Kahhan alleges that T-Mobile never provided notification about the loophole that the carrier is now citing:

After receiving notice of the price increase, he requested a copy of the terms and conditions that were in effect at the time he signed up for the One Plan Unlimited 55+, which has not been provided... T-Mobile continues to insist that its sole obligation is to pay his final bill if he cancels within 60 days due to a price increase. However, that was not part of the advertising that he relied upon or one of the terms when he signed up for his plan."

Lawsuit: T-Mobile must pay for breaking lifetime price guarantee

Class action filed over price hikes on plans with Un-contract price guarantee.

arstechnica.com

 

[NMBob]

They should be sued just for all of those stupid plan names. It's kinda like The New iPad!

 

[azkendrick]

We just left TMO for US Mobile. We can use VZW or TMO service, we decided to give Verizon a go. If it doesn't work for us we can change to the TMO service. We paid for a year in advance, $810 for 3 lines,

 

[CoMoMacUser]

Any cost will simply get passed onto the customer.

And shareholders.

 

[dynamojoe]

It’s weird to think my plan is actually older than the plan that’s being sued over. When they take away Simple Choice, I’m gone.

 

[I7guy]

John Legere was somewhat like Steve Jobs in that he was looking to give more value to customers. T-Mobile's current CEO Mike Sievert is greedy and thus like Tim Cook in that he is looking to give less value to customers in order to maximize profits.

More profits less value is working in apples case. Is it working in TMOs case? /s

 

[webkit]

The US cellular market has little choice, and thus high prices. I have been with Verizon for 13 years. I have had incredibly consistent billing thus far, and while they aren't perfect, my service is decent most places I go.

There are a number of choices out there including many MVNOs (yes, some of which are owned by a major carrier). Unless someone wants bundled features like "free" Netflix or takes advantage of the "free" or "discount" phone offers, there's probably little need to go with one of the major carriers. MVNOs typically offer more value from a strict voice/text/data standpoint.

However, today's plan prices are actually fairly inexpensive compared to decades past. When the iPhone came out in 2007, for example, the cheapest AT&T plan available for it was $59.99/month (around $90/month in today’s dollars) and that plan didn’t even include unlimited voice and text.

 

[webkit]

They weren't very good at anticipating inflation. Those were the good old years with no inflation.

I don't think it was about not "anticipating inflation." Some of it may have been hoping/expecting "wholesale" plan prices to stabilize and some of it may have been simply not worrying about the future i.e., letting the next CEOs deal with it.

 

[SalisburySam]

But think of all the lawyers that are supported .

“99% of all lawyers give the rest of them a bad name.” - Stephen Wright

 

[Graphate]

They weren't very good at anticipating inflation. Those were the good old years with no inflation.

Exactly, I am pretty sure up until 2020 inflation didn’t exist.

I signed up for T-Mobile One back then. Late last year, a phone sales guy in Target asked me how much I was paying for my mobile plan, and when I told him 2 unlimited lines for $100, he could only say "wow, yeah, hold on to that!" I know the promise was to never raise the price, but I filed that under "too good to be true." Prices pretty much always go up on everything. I actually wonder if we hadn't had this runaway inflation for so long if they would have been able to keep that promise. I mean, they have to pay their workforce and maintain and upgrade towers, and I'm sure none of that has gotten cheaper either. As much as I'm bummed I'm now paying 10% more, I actually understand the why. Probably not the popular thing to say, but I work at a company where we could use more money but can't get the price increase, and it makes delivering a quality product a lot harder.

I think many people thought they’d get what they were told they’d receive, however would that also mean they were limited to LTE and 5G speeds, even if 7G is standard?

Too good to be true shouldn’t be your burden to carry, it should be on the promisor who induced you to sign the contract.

Wow! That would never be tolerated in the UK but I guess we have super strong consumer rights. What were they thinking??

There’s a different balancing act in the US, less regulation but more consumer lawsuits vs higher regulation but fewer consumer lawsuits. It’s a trade off, and I’m not sure I know which system is better in the real world.

It must pay well to be an evil lawyer.

Which side has the evil lawyers? The ones representing T-Mobile or the ones representing the consumers?

A marketing statement is one thing. What does the actual service contract say?

Why can’t a marketing statement be part of a contract and why can’t a marketing statement give an injured party a path to remedy?

Which is precisely why class actions never benefit the user, just the lawyers. It’s a scam from the beginning.

It’s again the balancing act, less regulation more lawsuits. Lawsuits, including class action lawsuits are the method of discouraging bad corporate behavior, whether you’ve been burned by 193-degree coffee spilled by a coffee cup that was prone to collapse at those temperatures, or injured 2 USD by a company raising their prices.

A class action is oftentimes a way to aggregate small injuries, because you’ll never sue for 2 USD, but you and a million friends might.

 

[Wags]

Must have been in bad need of fast cash to boldly just raise prices. If tmo wanted off plan just to what other carriers do. Take away any equipment upgrade options and erode incentive add ons.

 

[nylonsteel]

If they offered a lifetime - they should honor what they say

 

[aapl owner]

I signed up for T-Mobile One back then. Late last year, a phone sales guy in Target asked me how much I was paying for my mobile plan, and when I told him 2 unlimited lines for $100, he could only say "wow, yeah, hold on to that!" I know the promise was to never raise the price, but I filed that under "too good to be true." Prices pretty much always go up on everything. I actually wonder if we hadn't had this runaway inflation for so long if they would have been able to keep that promise. I mean, they have to pay their workforce and maintain and upgrade towers, and I'm sure none of that has gotten cheaper either. As much as I'm bummed I'm now paying 10% more, I actually understand the why. Probably not the popular thing to say, but I work at a company where we could use more money but can't get the price increase, and it makes delivering a quality product a lot harder.

Thanks for a sane and intelligent response. Those who want to force the company to stick to a promise made years ago are clueless and greedy. Everyone knows the cost of everything has gone up a lot over the years (and so have most people salaries). If they can’t raise the price in those fixed price customers then they must overcharge their existing and new customers. Only people who will make out on this, and nearly all class action lawsuits, are the lawyers who collect millions and each customers get a few bucks. I say heck no to the damn greedy lawyers.