Sprint recently settled an Early Termination Fee (ETF) class action suit. Unfortunately for consumers, it’s a very raw deal… except to the class action attorneys involved.
And, it’s quite broad, covering customers from 1999 all the way to 2008.
The settlement makes a bunch of branching paths, but basically it says that you are entitled up to only a $90 credit, and in most cases a $25 to $35 credit, if you paid an ETF on a Sprint account. If you can’t provide the required documentation, all you can get is a waiver for the activation fee on a new Sprint account (and 100 bonus minutes for a year on the new plan).
But, worse, the terms are riddled with exceptions. For example, a customer who is in collections over an ETF may not be entitled to get even a paltry $25 credit on that debt, if Sprint has already sold the debt to a third-party (collection agency). In that event, a Sprint customer is only entitled to the waiver on a new activation fee, on a new plan.
And, of course, you can’t sign up for new service until you pay off the old ETF. Injury, meet insult.
PhoneNews.com suggests that you object to this proposed settlement, based on the extremely poor conditions of this settlement, including (but certainly not limited to) no option for Sprint to arbitrate ETFs charged… ETFs that consumers have legitimate ongoing objections to.
In short, the settlement doesn’t come close to amicably refunding consumers, hurts consumers who may already be in collections, and provides no recourse for the consumer to have their case examined.
To object to the settlement, you simply need to write a brief letter to the court, explaining why you think this is an unfair settlement for the consumer. It doesn’t have to be in legalese at all. You’ll then need to print two copies of it, and send it to the following addresses:
District of New Jersey, 50 Walnut Street, Newark, New Jersey 07101
Class Counsel at Carella, Byrne, Bain, Gilfillan, Cecchi, Stewart & Olstein, Attn: Sprint ETF Settlement, 5 Becker Farm Road, Roseland, New Jersey 07068
Quite damning for the settlement attorneys (and/or the claims administrator), is that the consumer-friendly version of the settlement web site omits the address to the court… preventing consumer’s objections from being heard.
Â
It’s also worth noting, that this settlement web site may be violating the law in and of itself. The header of the site states: “Please note: do not call or write to Sprint Nextel, their attorneys or the Court regarding this settlement.” A settlement web site is forbidden from advocating against asking users to not object to a settlement, which you must contact the court to do. Furthermore, class action attorneys are often contacted by settlement class members when a claims administrator fails to do their job.
Â
One thing is quite clear, either the settlement site was a rush job riddled with errors, or it was designed to prevent consumers from objecting to the suit. That’s all the more reason for you to take 10 minutes out of the day, and ask the judge in this case to throw out this raw deal of a settlement.
Update: The settlement web site has been updated, correcting the errors and egregious violations that we noted. However, we still encourage you to send in an objection letter to the court, if you want to help improve the terms of the settlement for consumers.
Most class actions claims end up with only the attorneys making out like bandits with dump truck loads of cash and the consumer generally getting a coupon. I’m not a fan of class actions claims.
You mean the only people who made out in a class action lawsuit are the lawyers? The horror, who could’ve forseen that? Class action lawsuits are chased down by lawyers for that very reason. They get million dollar payouts, the company has to pay out millions and spend millions on defense, and the customers get very little, plus the likelihood of higher rates to offset legal costs. If you get approached by a lawyer to participate in a class action lawsuit, tell them to pound sand.
Of course the lawyers make out like bandits on these cases…it was them that originated the concept! And to the people that got nailed with ETF….they are the one’s that entered the contract knowingly so suck it up and pay the price for your decision! This kind of crud is what is taking the world down the toilet…no one being held accountable for their actions.
While it is quite true that class action settlements commonly result in pennies-on-the-dollar settlements for consumers, this one is even worse. This settlement removes any liability from Sprint, for ETFs that they may have knowingly and wrongly sent into collections inappropriately.
By taking 10 minutes out of your day to write a letter, you can ask the court to improve these settlement terms, so that affected consumers can have their ETF investigated, and waived in full if it was incorrectly assessed.
I don’t understand. When customers sign the agreements, the terms states the cancellation is $200 if the customer cancels before the two year agreement is up. What is this class action suit saying Sprint(or Verizon a couple months ago–similar situation)did that was not on the contract?
Ken, the problem is that Sprint assessed an ETF for many customers, when they weren’t supposed to be charged an ETF. For example, when Sprint changes their terms… they’re supposed to let you reject those changes by canceling service ETF-free. Many times, Sprint ignored that and charged customers an ETF anyways.
There are many, many other examples. And, that’s why Sprint settled the lawsuit.
Chris, my job purchased me a Storm and is now paying for my monthly plan on Verizon. I cancelled my plan and my number was ported over from Sprint which I’ve had for like 8 yrs. I had purchased a Pearl from Sprint in Nov 2007 and had a year left on my 2 yr contract. I know there was all this talk of them changing something in regards to a fee and people could get out of their contract and not pay an ETF. I received a bill the other day with my ETF fee on it. Can I call them up and try to get the whole $200 waved from Sprint directly and mention I shouldn’t have to pay an ETF because of the change they had in the terms(of course I’d have to get a copy of it in my hands so I know what I was talking about before I called and all :b)? Should I pay like $110 and then do the settlement thing because they would eventually credit me $90 for the difference? What do you suggest?
Do not only pay $110. They will not credit your ETF to the account directly… that’s not how it works. Again, this settlement isn’t a sure thing, and we’re advocating that you first write to the court about how this settlement is not fair to the consumer.
In your personal situation, you are liable for the ETF. Prorated ETFs only apply to people that renewed their contracts after it was implemented. I would suggest paying the ETF in full, and applying for the settlement… the settlement may never wind up paying you a thing, but your account going into collections will wind up costing you much more on your credit score.
Finally, please don’t address questions to me. You’re basically telling thousands of people that you don’t want their help.
Class action attorney Paul Weiss faces charges of assault and battery by
three women who worked at his Chicago law firm, Freed & Weiss, according to
a complaint filed against him by the Illinois Attorney Registration and
Discipline Commission (ARDC).
Weiss was suspended by the Illinois Supreme Court in 1997 for making obscene
phone calls to several women, including a minor whom he’d seen at a high
school volleyball game.
The new complaint was entered Dec. 4 — the same day a New Jersey court gave
preliminary approval to a Sprint class action settlement in which Weiss,
class counsel, stands to share $4.6 million in attorneys’ fees.
Weiss, whose firm has been among the most active class action counsel in
Madison and St. Clair counties, is alleged to have violated the Illinois
Rules of Professional Conduct. The allegations, according to the complaint
amended on Jan. 5, include:
a.. In the summer of 2003, he approached an 18-year-old file clerk who “was
walking down the hall dressed in a khaki skirt and black shirt. Respondent
came up behind her, said ‘you look great,’ and then grabbed her buttocks and
said, ‘I just wanted you to know that.'”
a.. The file clerk was the half-sister of a legal assistant employed at the
firm, who claims that in her first week of employment in 2001, at age 19,
Weiss allegedly “brought her into a new office space, stood extremely close
to her, and made a comment to her about wanting to kiss her.”
The complaint itemizes several instances of alleged assault and battery, as
well as instances of repeated telephone harassment. It also states, “At some
time after January 7, 2003, Respondent cornered (legal assistant) while she
was on her way to the office restroom.
“Respondent then forced (legal assistant) into a stairwell where he
attempted to kiss her. Respondent grabbed (legal assistant’s) breasts,
touched her vagina over her clothing and attempted to put his hand down her
pants. When (legal assistant) resisted Respondent’s advances, Respondent
exposed himself and masturbated until he ejaculated on the stairwell wall.
During this incident, (legal assistant) repeatedly requested that he release
her and stop what he was doing.”
a.. An associate attorney hired in 2002 claims she was terminated at the end
of her first year after rebuffing Weiss’s advances.
“On September 13, 2002, Respondent entered (associate’s) office to discuss a
legal matter. Respondent then interjected, ‘You know, you need to start
coming in here wearing some low-cut (expletive) because sex sells.’
(Associate) replied with disgust, that sex had nothing to do with work.”
The ARDC claims Weiss has engaged in misconduct by committing criminal acts
and has engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and
which tends to bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute.
Jerome Larkin, ARDC administrator, and his counsel, Wendy Muchman, have
asked the matter be assigned to a hearing board panel, that a hearing be
held, and that a recommendation for discipline be made as warranted.
Court records related to Weiss’s 1997 suspension indicated that he had been
diagnosed with a mental condition called telephone scatologia, a psychiatric
disorder characterized by a recurrent urge or fantasy to make obscene
telephone calls.
His suspension lasted 30 days and he was placed on probation by the ARDC for
two years. Weiss moved to Seattle and practiced law there while his
punishment was meted out in Illinois.
Weiss resumed practice in Illinois in 1998, where he began securing large
verdicts and settlements as co-lead counsel on several class-action suits in
Madison County with Brad Lakin of the Lakin Law Firm.
But the firms had a falling out in 2006 and filed suits and counter suits
over control of class actions.
Last year, the Lakin Law Firm settled a Madison County suit against Freed
and Weiss, and Freed and Weiss settled a Cook County suit against the Lakin
firm.
But the detente was short-lived as the two firms recently renewed their
battle over competing Sprint class actions.
Two days after taking office, Madison County Circuit Judge Dennis Ruth
denied Lakin’s emergency motion for a restraining order against Freed &
Weiss and Sprint involving the New Jersey class action.
At a Dec. 3 hearing, Ruth played referee between Lakin and Richard Burke,
who teamed with Freed & Weiss after Lakin fired him.
The new judge inherited the case from retiring judge Nicholas Byron, who
certified a national class action against Sprint and appointed Lakin’s firm
as class counsel.
—
Class Counsel at Carella, Byrne, Bain, Gilfillan, Cecchi, Stewart & Olstein, Attn: Sprint ETF Settlement, 5 Becker Farm Road, Roseland, New Jersey 07068
James Cecchi, the attorney of the case who apparently settled with Sprint. His wife works as a magistrate judge in the court wehre the case was settled. According to Google, she has worked on several cases with Judge Linares.
Make your own conclusions.
went on settlement website, it state that the case was done through mediation or arbitration with some former judge Politan. James Cecchi according to the website of Carell Byrne bain worked for this former judge at some point. This Cecchi dude has his wife working in the same court house wehre the case is settled and has a former boss working on the settlment. Nice gig.
The 2nd complaint was filed on the 4th of Decemebr. On December 5, 2008, the Court preliminarily approved the Settlement. How the f is that possible.
Does the settlement only provide $90 for the entire account cancellation? Because we were charged $850 for canceling 4 lines of service. To make a long story short, several reps told us the contract date was different than it was supposed to be(which we have e-mails confirming this) and when we canceled our account they denied what the reps had told us. We then said we’re not paying for it because we have these e-mails confirming it. They then told us they were going to turn us over the creditors and ruin our credit, so we paid them…
The funny thing is no one is seeing the other side of this agruement. Early terms were created to stop unscrupulous people from getting discounted phones, stopping thier service and just turning around and selling them for profit.
Phone carriers do not manufacture the phones for thier service so they do not just simple get them for free to give to customers. Just like your cable company does not make TVs to use with thier cable service. So in the end its the few that screw it up for the rest of us because the same people who complained they were forced to sign a contract will be the same people complaining that they now have to pay full retail price for phones.
The settlement site still (or perhaps again) includes the statement, “Please do not call or write to Sprint Nextel, their attorneys or the Court regarding this settlement,” at both the top and bottom of the home page.
i was forced into paying $125 early termination fee when a year was unknowingly added in the middle of my 2 year contract,making it three years . I was told, after arguing and calling the better buisness bureau ,it was bieng investigated ,and taking my individual case further would cost much more than the $125. I am no longer a sprint user so i would not need any sprint coupons only a check will do even $90.
I was charges $ 200.00 cancellation fee
reason fo cancllation no service when we wenton vaation, and Sprint comfirmes they did not service Rosehill, Va
I have alrasy paid them $100.00
Comments and advise
You’re explanation of the situation gives little for me to go on, but when you pay part of a debt, that can be legally interpreted as an agreement to the entire debt. You may be stuck paying it off.