Learn what DirecTV lawsuits are out there, and how to take action…
If you’re experiencing issues with DirectTV, you’re not alone and may be able to receive compensation.
There are several current lawsuits and claims filed against DirectTV already. Most of these lawsuits are class action lawsuits which means you may be able to get in on the settlement.
Take a look at this list of lawsuits against DirectTV to see if you might be affected.
The Supreme Court has ruled that consumers must proceed to individual arbitration instead of suing DirectTV as a class. This 2015 story from The New York Times outlines the ruling:
The decision, by a 6-to-3 vote, was the latest in a series of Supreme Court decisions that have made it harder for consumers to go to court to pursue claims of fraud and defective products.
The new case, DirecTV v. Imburgia, No. 14-462, arose from a 2008 lawsuit brought by two customers who objected to the company’s early termination fees and sought to represent a class of people in the same situation. After the Supreme Court in 2011 allowed companies to use their contracts to forbid class actions and other mass adjudications, DirecTV asked a state court judge in California to dismiss the lawsuit and require arbitration.
According to the class action complaint filed in Seattle federal court in 2018, DirectTV unlawfully made customer’s personal information freely available online in violation of the federal Communications Act:
Plaintiff Jantos, through a simple internet search using a common search engine, discovered that his March 2017 bill from CenturyLink and DirecTV/DirecTV, LLC, was publicly available for anyone to view on the internet. The bill contained personally identifiable information, including his name, address, phone number, phone numbers that he had called and received calls from, and his DirecTV/DirecTV, LLC, billings. Concerned, and unsure if the information was only available to him due to his previous online access to his account, he investigated the scope of the disclosure. He discovered he was able to easily access personally identifying information of other subscribers of Defendants, including charges on other subscribers DirecTV/DirecTV, LLC, bills. Like the information he discovered online about himself, he was able to view the names, addresses, phone number, subscriptions, and bills from other subscribers. In order to confirm that the information was available to others, he asked another individual to attempt to access information from his computer as well. Like Jantos, this individual was able to access personally identifiable information of DirecTV/DirecTV, LLC, subscribers.
A Florida federal court judge has ordered a DirectTV customer to arbitrate his claims that DirectTV was charging his debit account without his authorization. Leagle recently published the Order:
Howse alleges that DirecTV violated his rights under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (“EFTA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1693-1693r, and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act, Fla. Stat. §§ 559.55-559.785, by debiting his checking account without authorization.
In sum, Howse received the contract containing the arbitration clause at least twice during the three days prior to his satellite television service commencing: once through DirecTV’s January 7, 2015 order confirmation email and again through the follow-up email sent within the next twenty-four hours. Howse does not dispute that he received these emails. Over the next three days, Howse could have cancelled his order if he did not accept any term of the contract, including the arbitration clause.
I went through a long call with the phone rep assuring that there were no other hidden charges or fees. The bottom line was that my bill was supposed to be around $67 a month for the first year, and that I would get premium Movie Channels for 3 months for free, and NFL Sunday Ticket for free for 12 months. I got my first bill and it was nearly $800.
As stated in the State of California Department of Justice press release, DirectTV settled civil lawsuits with 48 state attorneys generals for misleading sales and marketing practices:
“DIRECTV won customers by offering special deals with hidden costs, and also extended customers’ contracts without telling them,” Brown said. “With this settlement, DIRECTV will reimburse customers and change its sales and advertising practices to comply with the law.”
The settlement by Brown and 48 other state attorneys general was filed today in San Diego Superior Court. It requires DIRECTV to make full restitution to all victims. In addition, the company is required to pay $13.25 million to the 49 states and the District of Columbia in civil penalties and costs, and obey state laws.
Even if you aren’t able to cash in on these listed lawsuits, your complaint may fit arbitration with DirectTV. We can help you file a claim and get compensated – learn more here.