Straight Talk Cellular Phone Plans

February 2016: The appeal was voluntarily dismissed, the reasons for which have not been disclosed. (Hansell et al v. TracFone Wireless, Inc. dba Straight Talk Wireless et al, Case No. 15-16784, 9th Cir.)

September 2015: After an objector’s motion to reconsider the order granting final approval of the settlement was denied, the objector filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the decision to approve the settlement.

July 2015: A federal judge granted final approval of this settlement.

April 2015: The plaintiffs moved for final approval of a $40 million settlement of this class-action lawsuit, which, if approved, will also resolve three other related lawsuits. Information about each of these lawsuits is provided below:

  • Browning et al v. TracFone Wireless, Inc. et al, Case No. 14-cv-1347, N. D. CA.
  • Gandhi et al v. TracFone Wireless, Inc., Case No. 13-cv-5296, N. D. CA.
  • Blaqmoor et al v. TracFone Wireless, Inc., Case No. 13-cv-5295, N. D. CA.

The proposed settlement provides class members with both monetary and injunctive relief. According to the settlement terms, class members who either submit a valid claim or whose mailing address is already known by TracFone may receive a cash payment ranging from $2.15 to $65, depending on various factors (e.g., how the class member’s service was affected and when the class member was a TracFone customer). In addition, TracFone also agreed to make changes to its business practices, including, among other things, more clearly and prominently disclosing important information (such as the throttling limits or caps and the actual speeds to which customer data will be slowed) in the marketing of its “unlimited plan.” A final fairness hearing is scheduled for June 23, 2015. For more information, go to PrepaidPhoneRefund.com. (In Re TracFone Unlimited Service Plan Litigation, Case No. 13-cv-3440, N. D. CA.)

July 2013: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Walmart and TracFone Wireless for allegedly falsely advertising Straight Talk cellular phone plans as providing “unlimited” data service, when in fact, Walmart and TracFone “throttled” (i.e., reduced the speed of) or terminated subscribers’ access to data after a certain amount of data usage. (Hansel et al. v. TracFone Wireless, Inc. et al., Case No. 13-cv-03440, N.D. Cal.).

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags:



Leave a Reply

Back to Top ↑
  • Search Class-Action Tracker



  • Recent Class Actions

  • The Class-Action Tracker is intended to notify consumers about false advertising class-action lawsuits filed around the country, but does not necessarily reflect TINA.org’s opinion with respect to the lawsuits or disposition of the cases

  • Sign Up for E-mail Updates