dslreports logo
Man That Claims Comcast Got Him Fired Demands More Money

Last October we reported on a Price Waterhouse Coopers employee who claimed Comcast pressured his employer to fire him after he publicly criticized the company. Conal O’Rourke claimed he was billed $1,820 by Comcast for equipment he never asked for. After failing to get the charges reversed via traditional support, O'Rourke called the Comcast Controller's office, who in turn he claims, applied pressure on his employer and managed to get him fired.

Click for full size
Shortly after making the media rounds, O'Rourke filed a $1 million suit against Comcast.

Comcast (and O'Rourke's former employer) claim his dismissal had nothing to do with his Comcast inquiries, though in at least one media report Comcast claims O'Rourke tried to use his employer's name as leverage, since Price Waterhouse Coopers is contracted by Comcast.

Talks between O'Rourke's lawyer and Comcast had apparently been proceeding ever since, until recently when the negotiations appear to have broken down. In an amended complaint (hat tip to Ars Technica), O'Rourke says he now wants $5 million from the cable giant. The revised complaint now also accuses Comcast of illegally, publicly "characterizing the contents" of its conversations with O'Rourke in the media:

quote:
At no time did Mister O’Rourke give his consent for Comcast to release or in any way characterize the contents of his customer service calls to the general public....Comcast’s public disclosure of the existence and nature of Mr. O’Rourke’s private calls to Comcast customer service—which disclosure falsely portrays Mr. O’Rourke as an individual lacking in decency, ethics and integrity—is offensive and objectionable to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities.
Comcast's refusal to settle pretty clearly suggests its lawyers don't believe that O'Rourke has much in the way of specific documentation proving the company pressured Price Waterhouse Coopers in any meaningful fashion.

Comcast O'Rourke Lawsuit

view:
topics flat nest 

imanogre
join:2005-11-29
Smyrna, GA

1 recommendation

imanogre

Member

Wow

Just read the filing..... I hope Comcast loses..... Im betting Ms Pilla forwarded this request to an investigation division who used something like Lexus Nexus to find out this customer worked for PWC, so they could then talk to PWC about letting this guy go.

Again, just guessing -- but based on what Ive seen at previous employers, this is a very likely scenario.
gaforces (banned)
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA

1 recommendation

gaforces (banned)

Member

Re: Wow

He should have gone for 10 million.

beans
@verizon.net

beans

Anon

Re: Wow

Agreed
sludgehound
join:2007-03-12
New York, NY

sludgehound

Member

Yeah typical lawyereze sleeze

"its lawyers don't believe that O'Rourke has much in the way of specific documentation proving the company pressured Price Waterhouse Coopers in any meaningful fashion."
"specific documentation" I mean really! Places like PwC as so tightly insured and bound up just try to get 'proof'. Everything is claim, counter-claim, I'll look into it, etc. Big acctng place are so busy with paperwork not likely to have much time to bother with this kind of trivial matter not concerning them at the very top level of biz to biz. Nothing to be gained for either side. So poor duffer just get pushed aside into another lawyer's pocket.
Paper Chase come to mind?
Still, can't add any luster to Comcast rep.
GoodOmens
join:2005-07-06
Washington, DC

GoodOmens

Member

PCAOB?

So is he going to report comcast to the PCAOB? That would be interesting.
hchen42
join:1999-12-23
New York, NY

hchen42

Member

What's Comcast's side of the story?

I'd like to hear Comcast's response. Actually, I think the recording may dictate the outcome. IF I were the juror, if Mr. O'Rourke did acted inappropriately then all his defamation claims will be null. I might still reward him for Comcast's missed schedule appointment and over billing (assuming there's evidence supporting it).
wirelessdog
join:2008-07-15
Queen Anne, MD

wirelessdog

Member

Re: What's Comcast's side of the story?

I agree. I want to hear Comcast's response and the tapes. Also worth mentioning that ARS Technica appeared to post his name publicly before anyone else which would seem to render his self-righteous squeal that they released his name moot. I hate Comcast like everyone else, perhaps more so, but things about this stink and stink bad. Comcast has already alluded to this customer's behavior. I think the very first call he made to Comcast will really set the course for the outcome. If he acted professionally in the beginning and became irate as things progressed I think his anger is justified. If he acted like an ass from day one... well... he wouldn't want me as a juror. Time will tell.
hchen42
join:1999-12-23
New York, NY

hchen42

Member

Re: What's Comcast's side of the story?

said by wirelessdog:

he wouldn't want me as a juror. Time will tell.

Given you try to be impartial and willingness to listen to evidence, I would say you are the ideal (model?) juror. At least you give both side a chance.

caster
@sysvana.com

caster to hchen42

Anon

to hchen42
The forums hear are more than enough evidence that comcast billing system is messed up and overbills in error over and over.
hchen42
join:1999-12-23
New York, NY

hchen42

Member

Re: What's Comcast's side of the story?

said by caster :

The forums hear are more than enough evidence that comcast billing system is messed up and overbills in error over and over.

Agree, and that's why I said I might award Mr. O'Rourke on overbilling/missed schedule. The rest of the defamation accusation is out of the norm. In this case, I'd like to hear the actual evidence. The evidence is in the tape (for now).

Yucca Servic
join:2012-11-27
Rio Rancho, NM

Yucca Servic

Member

Comcast loses...

Scenario. Comcast loses after a long battle and finally has to pay out 10 Million dollars. Well guess who really pays. Comcast customers with another rate increase.

Comcast stepped in it this time and another black eye.

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy

Premium Member

Re: Comcast loses...

What I see them doing is settling but admitting no wrongdoing. Typical corporate response to lawsuits when they end up going to trial.
Nanaki (banned)
aka novaflare. pull punches? Na
join:2002-01-24
Akron, OH

1 recommendation

Nanaki (banned)

Member

Re: Comcast loses...

Yep settle and nda attachment. Basically the customer walks away with a reward for the law sit and a nda that basically says he can not say any thing. Then as others have said a rate hike for every one else. And of course once the rate hike pays off the lawsuit reard it will remain in place.

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy

Premium Member

Re: Comcast loses...

Or settle but the terms of the settlement remain confidential. And with a no future business agreement which means he'll have to relocate out of Comcast turf to get internet or put up with HughesNet/Excede for Internet and DirecTV for TV.
Nanaki (banned)
aka novaflare. pull punches? Na
join:2002-01-24
Akron, OH

Nanaki (banned)

Member

Re: Comcast loses...

More likely they would give him internet etc for free as part of the settlement.

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy

Premium Member

Re: Comcast loses...

Like I said they want no part of him, they'll probably settle, admit no wrongdoing and give him a non disclosure agreement and no future business agreement and be rid of him once and for all.

I've heard of retailers sending no trespass orders along with settlement checks when customers sue them. I do read the consumerist which this site links to a lot.

FureverFurry
RIP Daphne: 3/12/05 - 6/19/12
Premium Member
join:2012-02-20
49xxx
Zoom 5341J
ARRIS WBM760
Vonage VDV-21

FureverFurry

Premium Member

Comcast's refusal to settle = being right ?

"Comcast's refusal to settle pretty clearly suggests its lawyers don't believe that O'Rourke has much in the way of specific documentation proving the company pressured Price Waterhouse Coopers in any meaningful fashion."

Since when does refusal to settle equal being right? Comcast has untold gazillions of dollars at their disposal for legal defenses. Whether or not O'Rourke's law firm is working pro bono is moot: it is common tactics for large corporations to try to wear down the opposite side in legal matters.

Personally, I hope Comcast loses, and loses big time. On the other paw, watch your bills. There's sure to be a $5 fee titled "You don't expect US to pay for lawsuits, do you?" tacked on.
rody_44
Premium Member
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA

1 recommendation

rody_44

Premium Member

Re: Comcast's refusal to settle = being right ?

Two ways comcast goes they settle and settle fast. Or they fight to the bitter end and win. Im guessing they plan on winning.

w0g
o.O
join:2001-08-30
Springfield, OR

w0g

Member

comcast's refusal to settle

Actually could be something deeper. They don't want to play ball or care about their wrong doing in the case.

It could be they were as guilty as he claimed, but they don't want to budge and are defending themselves.
rody_44
Premium Member
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA

rody_44

Premium Member

Re: comcast's refusal to settle

Well they were clearly guilty of that latter allegation. The thing is whats the actual penalty for that and whats a jury going to award him for the public statement. I doubt very much at all. Hes not going to be able to prove the initial allegation and thats the one that involved damages. Its a lawyers grab.

anon
@fuhsd.org

anon

Anon

Contradiction

Price Waterhouse fired him and told him it was because they found out he had contacted Comcast, Comcast claims they never talked to price Waterhouse about him. Either price Waterhouse lied when they fired him or Comcast is lying. If this goes in front of a judge they are going to piss off the judge which is what can lead to a jury giving a big award.
wirelessdog
join:2008-07-15
Queen Anne, MD

wirelessdog

Member

Re: Contradiction

said by anon :

Price Waterhouse fired him and told him it was because they found out he had contacted Comcast,

Allegedly said. Again, we are only hearing one side of the story.