Results for "energy suppliers"

Ambit’s Energy Rates

December 14th, 2017

March 2017: A federal judge granted Ambit’s motion for summary judgment concluding that there was no fraudulent misrepresentation or fraudulent intent, among other things. To learn more about the judge’s decision, click here to read the full court order. 2015: A false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed against Ambit Energy for allegedly using a pyramid


Healthy Beverage’s Steaz Iced Green Tea and Energy Drinks

December 14th, 2017

May 2017: A federal judge granted Healthy Beverage’s motion to dismiss finding that plaintiffs failed to plausibly claim they relied on misrepresentations and failed to state a claim. The dismissal was . 2013: A false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed against Healthy Beveraage alleging that it unlawfully and misleadingly labels products – including Steaz Iced


Agway Energy Services

December 13th, 2017

In December 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Agway Energy Services for allegedly using a “bait-and-switch scheme” to lure consumers to switch to its electricity supply service. According to the complaint, the company advertises initial teaser rates for a limited period of time followed by market variable rates when, according to plaintiffs, the variable


XOOM Energy

December 5th, 2017

February 2017: A federal judge dismissed some of the claims in this lawsuit while allowing others – including fraud claims – to move forward. To read the full decision and learn more about the judge’s reasoning, click here. 2015: A class-action lawsuit was filed against XOOM Energy (a company that sells electricity and gas to


Stream Energy

October 25th, 2017

October 2017: Plaintiffs asked the Court to stay the proceedings in this case in order to give the parties time to finalize a settlement agreement. September 2016: After the plaintiff agreed to dismiss parts of the complaint and left only false advertising and breach of contract claims, a federal judge granted Stream Energy’s motion to


Just Energy Rates

October 5th, 2017

In October 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Just Energy for allegedly enticing customers to sign up for its services by offering energy at low initial “teaser rates” without adequately disclosing that, after the teaser rate period expires, customers are charged “exorbitant variable energy rates” that are higher than the rates charged by other


Pennsylvania Gas & Electric Energy Rates

September 19th, 2017

In June 2017, a federal judge preliminarily approved a settlement of a class-action lawsuit against Pennsylvania Gas & Electric alleging that the company engages in a “bait and switch trap.” The July 2014 complaint alleges that the energy supplier promises consumers who switch to their energy supplier will pay competitive market-based rates and save on


IDT Energy

September 19th, 2017

June 2015: This case was stayed pending the resolution of a Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission proceeding, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, et al v. IDT Energy, Inc. March 2014: A false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed against IDT Energy in March 2014 (and amended in October 2014). The complaint, which was originally filed in state court and


Starion Energy Rates

July 25th, 2017

In May 2017, a state judge preliminarily approved a settlement of a class-action lawsuit against Starion Energy. The January 2017 complaint alleges that the company offers low initial rates for electricity and a month-to-month variable rate that is tied to the company’s cost of electricity when, according to plaintiffs, Starion Energy charges an “extraordinarily high


Starion Energy

July 6th, 2017

April 2016: The named plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the dismissal of the lawsuit. March 2016: A federal judge granted the company’s motion to dismiss finding that the complaint fails to plead a plausible claim. The dismissal was . To learn more about the reasons for the dismissal, click here. February 2015: A


Verde Energy USA

July 6th, 2017

May 2015: This action was voluntarily dismissed , the reasons for which have not been disclosed. March 2015: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Verde Energy USA, Inc. for allegedly deceptively inducing consumers to switch their electricity supplier. Specifically, plaintiffs claim that the company offers low initial rates for electricity (i.e., a “teaser rate”) and


Viridian Energy Rates

June 29th, 2017

February 2017: A Consolidated Class Action Complaint, which consolidates three cases, was filed. According to the complaint, Viridian Energy deceptively advertises low initial rates for energy followed by variable rate plans that are tied to the market rate when, according to plaintiffs, customers end up paying four, five, or six times more for their energy.


Constellation Energy Power Choice

May 24th, 2017

In May 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Constellation Energy Power Choice for allegedly using a bait-and-switch marketing scheme to make consumers believe they will save money if they switch their electricity supplier. According to the plaintiffs, the company deceptively offers a low initial rate for a specific number of months without informing consumers


Spark Energy Rates

April 26th, 2017

In April 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Spark Energy for allegedly using a bait-and-switch marketing scheme by offering consumers an initial teaser rate for their electricity and a subsequent “variable market rate” without telling consumers that the variable rate is “substantially higher” than the teaser rate and does not actually fluctuate based on


Direct Energy Services

April 3rd, 2017

In March 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Direct Energy Services, LLC for allegedly deceptively advertising low, temporary fixed rates without adequately disclosing its variable rate pricing structure. According to the complaint, Direct Energy customers often pay more for energy than they would have if they stayed with their traditional energy supplier. (Forte et


Hiko Energy

December 22nd, 2016

June 2016: This action was dismissed because the parties settled. For more information about the settlement, click here. September 2014: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Hiko Energy LLC for allegedly deceptively using a bait-and-switch scheme. Specifically, plaintiffs claim that the company promises customers who switch to Hiko Energy as their energy supplier will save


HIKO Energy Rates

December 22nd, 2016

May 2016: A federal judge granted final approval of a settlement pertaining to five related false advertising class actions against Hiko Energy: Chen v. Hiko Energy Sasso v. Hiko Energy Bogdanski v. Hiko Energy Kantor v. Hiko Energy Spillman v. Hiko Energy According to the settlement terms, class members may choose to receive cash or


Monster Energy

September 8th, 2016

July 2016: The Ninth Circuit revived some of the claims in this lawsuit finding that they were not preempted and the FDA did not have primary jurisdiction over them. Other claims, including those regarding the caffeine content within the drinks, were not revived. To learn more about the Court’s decision, click here. November 2013: A


5-Hour ENERGY

July 13th, 2016

June 2013: Multiple lawsuits were transferred to one court to be heard together. For more information about that case, click here. (In Re: 5-Hour Energy Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, MDL No. 2438, United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation) Early 2013: A class-action lawsuit were filed against the makers of 5-Hour ENERGY® Drink for


Viridian Energy

June 27th, 2016

May 2016: The named plaintiff voluntarily dismissed this action . The reasons for the dismissal have not yet been disclosed. (Landau et al v. Viridian Energy PA, LLC, Case No. 16-cv-1938, E. D. PA.) Later in May, the same named plaintiff filed another class-action lawsuit making similar allegations. Specifically, the May complaint alleges that the



Back to Top ↑