AT&T Tries, Fails to Settle With Throttled User
Threatens Service Disconnection if he Won't Talk
by Karl Bode 09:09AM Wednesday Mar 14 2012 Tipped by tmpchaos
AT&T may have modified their throttling practices
, but they still face a legal threat from users angry about the company's definition of "unlimited" being somewhat unique. The other day we noted
how an AT&T customer successfully sued AT&T for $850, after AT&T clearly limited their supposedly "unlimited" wireless data service. Matt Spaccarelli filed the court case in mid-February and went to court with AT&T last Friday. The Associated Press
notes that AT&T has since threatened Spaccarelli with service shut off if he didn't agree to sit down to settlement talks -- something the user isn't interested in:
AT&T is offering to discuss a settlement to an iPhone user who won a small-claims case that alleged the company was slowing down his "unlimited" data service. A law firm retained by AT&T Inc. also threatened in a letter dated Friday to shut off Matthew Spaccarelli's phone service if he doesn't sit down to talk....In its letter, AT&T asked Spaccarelli to be quiet about the settlement talks, including the fact that it offered to start them, another common stipulation. Spaccarelli said he was not interested in settling, and forwarded the letter to The Associated Press.
The letter doesn't indicate how much AT&T is willing to settle for, but we're guessing they're eager to pay more than $850 to put what has been a very ugly media story to bed.
134 comments .. click to read
|reply to 25139889 |
Re: O.k. stuff like this has to stop
The problem is they phrased it conditionally. We'll shut off your service if you don't negotiate. A jury could easily decide that shutting off his service had nothing to do with his TOS violation and was actually an attempt to extort him into settling.
|reply to skeechan |
But with the duopolies that exist, or just plain lack of viable alternatives, ditching one bad carrier for another is pointless. So, laws are in place, and politicians are paid off, to keep things as they are. The only real way to make a difference is to cut off service. If everyone would just cancle their data phones, and cut out their cable, then maybe changes would be made due to lack of demand. Moving that demand from one asshole to another doesn't really do jack shit.
Play DSLr Mafia: »Pub Games
|reply to moonpuppy |
said by moonpuppy:Threatening someone with BUSINESS & SERVICE consequences isn't a crime. That is just doing business and happens everyday in thousands of lawsuit negotiations. Now if they threatened to break his legs, that would be a crime.
Seriously, threatening someone in an active litigation should be grounds for criminal prosecution. ATT has no right to threaten someone for not sitting down to talks.
The ATT lawyers involved need to have their licenses suspended or revoked.
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.