Seattle PI
Quote:
The state of Washington is suing Internet giant Comcast for $100 million, following a year-long investigation into alleged misrepresentation of its Service Protection Plan and charging customers with improper service call fees.
"The bottom line: I refuse to let Comcast put profits before people," state Attorney General Bob Ferguson told a Monday news briefing.
The AG's suit accuses Comcast of more than 1.8 million violations of Washington's Consumer Protection Act, and charges that Comcast violated the CPA to all of its nearly 1.2 million Washington subscribers due to a deceptive "Comcast Guarantee."
The lawsuit follows a breakdown last week in talks between the state and Comcast.
"We worked with the Attorney General's office to address every issue they raised and we made several improvements based on their input," Beth Hester, Comcast's vice president for external affairs, claimed in a statement.
"Given that we were committed to continue working collaboratively with the Attorney General's office, we're surprised and disappointed that they have instead chosen litigation. We stand behind our products and services and will vigorously defend ourselves."
Ferguson shot back: "They are not surprised -- Period. Our negotiations came to a conclusion last week. They understood what was coming . . . They knew what the problems were more than a year ago, and (until recently) did nothing to correct them."
The Attorney General's lawsuit is the first of its kind in the country, although Comcast's Service Protection Plan is a national program and, according to the AG, many of the improper practices are used in all of Comcast's markets.
Ferguson has a reputation for taking on powerful interests.
The Comcast suit follows a lawsuit in May against Johnson & Johnson, concerning a vaginal mesh implant. Last December, Ferguson sued the iYogi tech company, accusing the company of making users believe their computers had a virus and wanting money to repair it.
The AG has also brought -- and won -- litigation against the Grocery Manufacturers Association for laundering millions of dollars in contributions to fight a 2013 initiative that would have required labeling of genetically modified foods. Ferguson has spurned a deal and asked a court to impose penalties.
Ferguson is investigating initiative kingpin Tim Eyman in a case that involves the channeling of campaign contributions to Eyman's personal use.
The suit against Comcast rests on three legs:
--The AG's lawsuit charges that Comcast misled 500,000 Washington consumers and deceived them into paying at least $73 million in subscription fees over the last five years for a "protection plan" with significant, undisclosed limitations.
Consumers signing up and paying $4.99 a month for the Service Protection Plan supposedly to avoid being charged if a Comcast technician visits their home to fix an issue covered by the plan. Comcast regularly claimed its "comprehensive" plan covered the cost of all service calls.
But Comcast allegedly failed to tell customers that the plan does NOT cover repairs to any "wall-fished" wiring -- wiring inside a wall -- which constitutes the vast majority of wiring inside homes. According to the AG, Comcast representatives told customers 75 percent of the time that the plan covered all inside wiring.
Customer service scripts, acquired by the AG, direct Comcast representatives to say that they plan covers service calls "related to inside wiring" or "wiring inside your home."
--The AG's suit accuses Comcast of charging fees to many non-Service Protection Plan subscribers for services that they should have gotten free.
"Comcast deceives consumers through the Customer Guarantee it makes to all 1.2 million Washington customers," the AG explained in a statement. "Comcast's Customer Guarantee promises, 'We won't charge you for a service visit that results from a Comcast equipment or network problem.'"
Contrary to its promise, the AG alleges, Comcast charged thousands of Washington customers for service calls that resulted from a Comcast equipment or network problem. The company used to provide its technicians with a service call fix code that expressly allowed them "to add services charges to a normally not charged fix code."
--The AG investigation discovered thousands of instances of improper credit screening by Comcast, "unnecessarily impacting the credit reports of those customers." Comcast requires a deposit for equipment, but that deposit can be waived if a credit check determines that the customer has a high credit score.
In over 6,000 occasions, the AG says, Washington consumers paid a deposit to Comcast despite credit checks revealing the customers had high credit scores.
Ferguson wants Comcast to pay, and stop playing with customers.
The AG is asking over $73 million in restitution to pay back Service Protection Plan subscriber payments.
The state wants full restitution for all service calls that applied an improper resolution code, estimated to be at least $1 million.
The AG is asking that improper credit checks be removed from credit reports of more than 6,000 Comcast customers.
The Attorney General wants as much as $2,000 for each Comcast violation of the Consumer Protection Act.
--The AG wants injunctive relief in which Comcast would have to clearly disclose limitations in its Service Protection Plan in advertising and through its representatives.
"This case is a classic example of a big corporation deceiving its customers for financial gain," said Ferguson.
"The bottom line: I refuse to let Comcast put profits before people," state Attorney General Bob Ferguson told a Monday news briefing.
The AG's suit accuses Comcast of more than 1.8 million violations of Washington's Consumer Protection Act, and charges that Comcast violated the CPA to all of its nearly 1.2 million Washington subscribers due to a deceptive "Comcast Guarantee."
The lawsuit follows a breakdown last week in talks between the state and Comcast.
"We worked with the Attorney General's office to address every issue they raised and we made several improvements based on their input," Beth Hester, Comcast's vice president for external affairs, claimed in a statement.
"Given that we were committed to continue working collaboratively with the Attorney General's office, we're surprised and disappointed that they have instead chosen litigation. We stand behind our products and services and will vigorously defend ourselves."
Ferguson shot back: "They are not surprised -- Period. Our negotiations came to a conclusion last week. They understood what was coming . . . They knew what the problems were more than a year ago, and (until recently) did nothing to correct them."
The Attorney General's lawsuit is the first of its kind in the country, although Comcast's Service Protection Plan is a national program and, according to the AG, many of the improper practices are used in all of Comcast's markets.
Ferguson has a reputation for taking on powerful interests.
The Comcast suit follows a lawsuit in May against Johnson & Johnson, concerning a vaginal mesh implant. Last December, Ferguson sued the iYogi tech company, accusing the company of making users believe their computers had a virus and wanting money to repair it.
The AG has also brought -- and won -- litigation against the Grocery Manufacturers Association for laundering millions of dollars in contributions to fight a 2013 initiative that would have required labeling of genetically modified foods. Ferguson has spurned a deal and asked a court to impose penalties.
Ferguson is investigating initiative kingpin Tim Eyman in a case that involves the channeling of campaign contributions to Eyman's personal use.
The suit against Comcast rests on three legs:
--The AG's lawsuit charges that Comcast misled 500,000 Washington consumers and deceived them into paying at least $73 million in subscription fees over the last five years for a "protection plan" with significant, undisclosed limitations.
Consumers signing up and paying $4.99 a month for the Service Protection Plan supposedly to avoid being charged if a Comcast technician visits their home to fix an issue covered by the plan. Comcast regularly claimed its "comprehensive" plan covered the cost of all service calls.
But Comcast allegedly failed to tell customers that the plan does NOT cover repairs to any "wall-fished" wiring -- wiring inside a wall -- which constitutes the vast majority of wiring inside homes. According to the AG, Comcast representatives told customers 75 percent of the time that the plan covered all inside wiring.
Customer service scripts, acquired by the AG, direct Comcast representatives to say that they plan covers service calls "related to inside wiring" or "wiring inside your home."
--The AG's suit accuses Comcast of charging fees to many non-Service Protection Plan subscribers for services that they should have gotten free.
"Comcast deceives consumers through the Customer Guarantee it makes to all 1.2 million Washington customers," the AG explained in a statement. "Comcast's Customer Guarantee promises, 'We won't charge you for a service visit that results from a Comcast equipment or network problem.'"
Contrary to its promise, the AG alleges, Comcast charged thousands of Washington customers for service calls that resulted from a Comcast equipment or network problem. The company used to provide its technicians with a service call fix code that expressly allowed them "to add services charges to a normally not charged fix code."
--The AG investigation discovered thousands of instances of improper credit screening by Comcast, "unnecessarily impacting the credit reports of those customers." Comcast requires a deposit for equipment, but that deposit can be waived if a credit check determines that the customer has a high credit score.
In over 6,000 occasions, the AG says, Washington consumers paid a deposit to Comcast despite credit checks revealing the customers had high credit scores.
Ferguson wants Comcast to pay, and stop playing with customers.
The AG is asking over $73 million in restitution to pay back Service Protection Plan subscriber payments.
The state wants full restitution for all service calls that applied an improper resolution code, estimated to be at least $1 million.
The AG is asking that improper credit checks be removed from credit reports of more than 6,000 Comcast customers.
The Attorney General wants as much as $2,000 for each Comcast violation of the Consumer Protection Act.
--The AG wants injunctive relief in which Comcast would have to clearly disclose limitations in its Service Protection Plan in advertising and through its representatives.
"This case is a classic example of a big corporation deceiving its customers for financial gain," said Ferguson.
