Learn what Optimum lawsuits are out there, and how to take action…
Many customers of Optimum (which is also known as Altice USA, and was once Cablevision) would say that company is no exception.
In the past few years, there have been a number of legal proceedings against Optimum.
Here are some Optimum lawsuits to know about:
Like many legal questions, the answer is “it’s complicated.”
As with many other internet service providers, Optimum tries their best to ensure that their best interests are considered. Your Optimum subscriber agreement will often include language saying that you cannot sue them in most types of legal courts. However, consumers will always have the option to either take Optimum to a small claims court, or to file a consumer arbitration claim against them.
We’re biased, but consumer arbitration is often the better option. It’s also the one we can help with!
Class action lawsuits are designed to bring together a class of individuals with the same complaint. However, if you’re an Optimum customer, you often won’t have the option to file or join a class action.
Because of your Optimum contract, there will often be specific wording that prevents you from starting Optimum lawsuits or jumping into any Class Action that you find (this has not always been the case, and the story of why can be an interesting read).
The following Optimum lawsuits are usually lawsuits against Optimum filed by a government entity (which have more legal options than consumers), long-running older lawsuits, or corporate disputes involving Optimum.
At FairShake, we’re reinventing the Optimum lawsuit process. Optimum complaints are common, and many consumers often have the same questions regarding their legal rights with the company. Rather than going after an Optimum Class Action suit — which is usually not even possible — we’ll file a personalized legal document with the company, and guide you through the legal process.
There are a bunch of ways to make a claim against Optimum, including with the FCC or your credit card provider.
But your legal options typically involve one of two paths:
You can Sue Optimum in Small Claims Court, and be asked to attend a court hearing and pay legal fees with this type of Optimum lawsuit.
Or, you can do everything from your home. Consumer Arbitration is the process laid out by Optimum’s contract in place of a lawsuit. It lets you argue your case before an independent arbitrator (like a judge) who can force them to fix the problem and to compensate you. We at FairShake help make this process easy and convenient. Find out how…
Optimum Lawsuit on Terms of Service Complaint
Altice-owned Optimum is facing a new class action lawsuit for the company’s cancellation policies. As we noted late last year, under Altice ownership, Optimum is now billing customers that cancel through the end of their billing cycle, even if they’ve already turned in all of their equipment — or moved to a new location. Under Cablevision, customers that cancelled service immediately stopped having to pay the company (unless they owed a balance).
But a former Optimum customer is taking the company to court, claiming that Optimum and Altice cable broke New York’s General Business Law § 349 for deceptive practices and for illegally changing the terms and conditions of its cancellation policy “without adequate notice.”
The class action lawsuit laments that Optimum customers canceling service before the end of a billing cycle can incur $100 or more in additional charges for cable service no longer being received after turning in cable equipment as part of a move or switch to another TV, phone and broadband provider.
Optimum Lawsuit over Fraud and Ageism Claims
The $17.7 billion acquisition of Cablevision by France-based telecom giant Altice marked the end of an era for the New York media world in 2016. The longtime cable operator was rebranded, though its Optimum system kept its name, while and Cablevision’s omnipresent Dolan family refocused its attention on Madison Square Garden and other pursuits.
But the Dolans are not ready to go gentle into that good night, apparently. In a lawsuit filed today in Delaware Chancery Court, the family says Altice violated the merger agreement and also committed fraud, principally for allegedly starving the hyper-local News 12 Networks of resources. Altice also has laid off dozens of workers, the suit says, and plans to get rid of established 60-year-old anchor Colleen McVey because executives allegedly sought a “fresh look” for its on-air talent.
Optimum Lawsuit for Smart Router Concerns
The latest suit is being lobbed at Cablevision over allegations that using MSO-supplied wireless routers violates the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Courthouse News Service reports. Cablevision sets up its homespots “Optimum Smart Routers” that are provided to residential high-speed Internet customers at no charge; customers do have the option to purchase and use their own WiFi routers.
The class action suit, filed by July 16 by lead plaintiff Paul Jensen, claims that Cablevision didn’t ask for his consent to use the router as a quasi-public hotspot, and asserts that the practice compromises his Internet speed, puts him at a greater security risk, and also increases his electricity costs, the report added.
Optimum Lawsuit on Updated Cancellation Complaints
A former Optimum customer has filed suit against Cablevision and Altice over a billing policy change that allegedly allows for customers to be charged for the entirety of their current billing period no matter when they cancel their services.
The plaintiff says he called the defendants on January 26, 2019, to cancel his Optimum cable and internet services. The same day, the case explains, he returned his equipment to an Optimum retail location and was told that he was responsible for paying for his service for the entire current billing period, which had only begun three days earlier and would end February 22. The man claims he would have canceled Optimum earlier had he been informed that the defendants would continue to charge him for services he could no longer use.
The lawsuit seeks to cover a proposed nationwide class of consumers who subscribed to Optimum services before October 10, 2016, canceled their services before the end of their then-current billing cycle, and were charged for the entirety of the final billing cycle.
Optimum Lawsuit over Set-Top Cable Boxes
NEWARK — New Jersey Cablevision customers — and former customers — may be in for a bit of financial help with a proposed settlement in federal court of a class action lawsuit concerning alleged overcharges on cable boxes.
The settlement, first announced in December, still requires a final fairness hearing in federal court in Newark in September.
Under the terms of the settlement, customers in New Jersey, New York and Connecticut who subscribed to Cablevision’s video services and paid a fee to lease the box between April 30, 2004, and March 9, 2016, may be eligible to share in the proceeds of the settlement.
Optimum and Verizon Sue Each Other
Cablevision Systems and Verizon Communications have agreed to settle litigation that centered on ads about Verizon’s WiFi-related speed claims and ads from Cablevision that took aim at the telco’s FiOS service.
The companies each released this statement: “Cablevision and Verizon have resolved their disputes to both parties’ satisfaction.” They did not elaborate on the terms of the settlement.
In August, U.S. District Court in Islip, New York, issued a temporary restraining order that required Cablevision Systems to temporarily pull certain “anti-FiOS advertising” while also affirming Verizon’s WiFi-related speed claims. At the time, Cablevision noted that the judge did not rule that the MSO must pull all anti-FiOS ads, but that the temporary injunction is limited to ads asserting that Verizon is a “liar,” or tells “lies.”
Optimum Lawsuit over Hurricane-Relief Credits
New York resident Irwin Bard and his son have filed a $250 million lawsuit that alleges that Cablevision customers after Hurricane Sandy are being forced to pay for non-existent cable, internet and telephone services. The plaintiffs allege that Cablevision is obligated to immediately rebate every customer for the period of time service was disrupted.
“The lawsuit misstates the facts and is without merit,” says a statement by Cablevision in response. “But lawsuits aside, we have an extremely broad and customer friendly credit policy following Sandy.”
A Cablevision spokesperson says that customers can call to process their credit to visit a section of the company’s website to enter the time of period they were out of service.
The initial question presented in the lawsuit is whether cable customers need to opt-into credits or whether the company should proactively apply them.