The Washington state is pressing charges against Comcast for $100 million, after a year-long investigation.
State Attorney General (AG) Bob Ferguson has announced that he is ready to take on Comcast's practice of placing "profits before people."
The AG's investigation exposed the company for misinforming clients about its Service Protection Plan (SPP) and charging them with improper service call fees.
According to the lawsuit (PDF), Comcast is accused of more than 1.8 million violations of Washington's Consumer Protection Act. The data carrier purportedly deceived nearly 1.2 million subscribers from the Washington State via a so-called "Comcast Guarantee."
Beth Hester, the vice president of Comcast for external affairs, claims that her company cooperated with the AG's office to remedy all problems and concerns. She adds that Comcast even tweaked some of its policies as a result of the AG negotiations.
"[W]e're surprised and disappointed that they have instead chosen litigation," Hester says. She adds that Comcast will set up a "vigorously" legal defense.
Ferguson notes that the enterprise has no reason to act surprised, as the company did little to remedy its problems until recently.
The AG has established himself as a state representative who is unafraid to lock horns with important names from all industries. In 2015, Ferguson made some enemies in the tobacco industry after he proposed setting the legal age for smoking at 21 years old. Johnson & Johnson and iYogi are more examples of global brands that Ferguson took to court.
The lawsuit makes three main charges against Comcast:
• The AG affirms that Comcast misled about half a million consumers from the State of Washington. The suit points out that Comcast falsely advertised a "protection plan" with significant, undisclosed limitations, for which the clients shelled out a total of $73 million in subscription fees in the past five years.
Comcast was luring customers into purchasing a monthly $4.99 SPP in order to avoid extra charges should a technician make a home visit to fix an issue. The company has dubbed the plan as "comprehensive," suggesting that all expenses for service calls would be covered by subscribing to it.
What Comcast omitted to tell its clients is that repairs to any "wall-fished" wiring are not covered by the plan. Keep in mind that almost all of its subscribers' home wiring is wall-fished. The AG's suit says that in three out of four cases, Comcast members told customers that the plan takes care of all inside wiring.
• The AG's suit states that Comcast asked subscribers that were not part of the SPP to pay for services that were normally free of charge.
The AG points out that the 1.2 million Washington customers who signed a Customer Guarantee were deceived. The Guarantee specifically underlines that Comcast does not charge clients for service visits that are due to faulty networks or malfunctioning Comcast equipment.
The AG alleges that Comcast did nevertheless charged many Washington customers that faced issues that were a direct consequence of problems with the network or Comcast's own equipment. The suit explains that the company permitted its field technicians to "to add services charges to a normally not charged fix code."
• Last, but not least, investigation from the AG unveiled that Comcast indulged in numerous improper credit screenings.
Comcast asks its customers to make a deposit when having equipment installed, but the sum might be waived in the case of a customer with a high credit score. The investigation uncovered that in more than 6,000 instances, Comcast forced clients to pay the deposit despite having high credit scores.
Ferguson is determined to see Comcast pay for its shady practices.
The suit asks for more than $73 million, in order to compensate subscribers who poured money into the SPP. For service calls that were labeled improperly, the state demands Comcast to pay an estimated sum of $1 million, minimum.
On the credit report issue, the AG wants that the improper credit checks deleted from the credit reports of those affected. If it loses the legal action, Comcast will have to pay about $2,000 per each violation of the Consumer Protection Act.
The AG also demands that Comcast delivers a public information campaign to clarify to customers the contents and limitations of its SPP.
