The customers filed their AT&T bait-and-switch class action lawsuit in June 2019. The judge did not allow customers to claim that the fee itself violated California law, and did not allow customers to make claims against the company before the 2018 identification of the fee in question. Judge Beeler did trim some claims from the AT&T bait-and-switch class action lawsuit.

The customers claim AT&T had wrongly tacked an administrative fee onto the advertised rate, yet AT&T responded that the customers could not complain because as customers, they are aware of the fee and are locked into a contract. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler stated that despite the company’s protestations, Ian Vianu and Irrina Bukchin could sue the company while still being current AT&T customers. Customers accused AT&T of misleading them, and making hundreds of millions of dollars in profit, by telling them the administrative fees were legitimate surcharges.Ī judge has rejected AT&T’s attempt to dismiss a class action lawsuit challenging the company’s so-called bait-and-switch pricing scheme.Objector Eric Hughes argues the class action settlement does not fix AT&T’s alleged lack of transparency about the fee, its location on the billing statement and the alleged deceptive nature of its description on the company’s website.The objector argues the class action settlement allows AT&T to continue charging what it calls administrative fees and does not address a “core issue” of the complaint.An AT&T customer objected to a proposed $14 million class action settlement agreed to by the company to resolve claims it charged its customers an improper fee.(Photo Credit: askarim/Shutterstock) Update:

Contact att wireless