Verizon, Sprint to pay $158M over "cramming" cases

[steve2470]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/verizon-sprint-to-pay-158m-to-settle-cramming-cases/

Verizon (VZ) and Sprint (S) agreed to pay a combined $158 million - including $120 million in refunds to consumers - to settle charges they allowed their customers to be illegally billed by third parties, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said on Tuesday.

The settlements, which are subject to final court approval, were announced in conjunction with the Federal Communications Commission and the state attorneys general. The wireless providers also agreed to pay $38 million in federal and state penalties, as well as agreeing to improve oversight of third-party billing.

"Sprint and Verizon had flawed billing systems that allowed merchants to add unauthorized charges to wireless customer bills," CFPB Director Richard Cordray said in a statement. "Today's actions will put $120 million back into the pockets of harmed consumers and require these companies to improve their billing practices going forward."

Most consumers were targeted online through ads that once clicked on, brought them to websites asking for their cellphone numbers. Some merchants tricked consumers into providing their numbers to get "free" digital content only to be charged for it, the bureau said. In other cases, merchants fabricated charges without delivering any goods or communication with consumers.

[Octafish]

1. Free if you pay for it.

And the CEOs skip jail to remain free to do business, perhaps even with other people's money.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Hey, Octa--Wanna help me

start a GoFundMe account to help Verizon & Sprint make th fine payment?

Crap. I didn't think so.

[Octafish]

4. Why not? It's our patriotic duty to bail out banksters.

Next step in the New Feudalism is to pay the phone company not to use their phone.

It makes perfect sense.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. And maybe a little fee for the service of tracking us

and recording our conversations for the NSA. Hey, it's a valuable service.

[Octafish]

7. The only one to go to jail was the whistleblower.

Oh, yah. That was QWEST.

Only One Big Telecom CEO Refused To Cave To The NSA ... And He's Been In Jail For 4 Years

MICHAEL KELLEY JUN. 12, 2013, 2:44 PM
BusinessInsider.com

Former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio is currently serving a six-year sentence after being convicted of insider trading in April 2007 for selling $52 million of stock in the spring of 2001 as the telecommunications carrier appeared to be deteriorating.

During the trial his defense team argued that Nacchio, 63, believed Qwest was about to win secret government contracts that would keep it in the black.

Nacchio alleged that the government stopped offering the company lucrative contracts after Qwest refused to cooperate with a National Security Agency surveillance program in February 2001.

That claim gains new relevance these days, amid leaks by whistleblower Edward Snowden that allege widespread domestic surveillance by the NSA.

Back in 2006 Leslie Cauley of USA Today, citing multiple people with direct knowledge of the arrangement, reported that shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks America's three largest telecoms signed contracts to provide the NSA with detailed call records from hundreds of millions of people across the country.

CONTINUED at a buggy POS website...

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-and-the-nsa-2013-6

Next time there's a peace on, maybe, then. Until then, we're free to pay for the wars, too.

[hifiguy]

3. They probably made more than than in kickbacks

from the third-party operators. Just another cost of doing business in Pirate America.

[gratuitous]

6. That's nice, but . . .

Individual consumers will probably see less than $10 each. Our outmoded system of assessing damages on companies that have millions of monthly customers has to be updated. At this time, we have only the class action available. When a company rips off its customers for a buck or two every month, it can realize ill-gotten profits in the millions every month. But each customer loses just a couple of bucks, which isn't worth pursuing.

Perhaps we need to update our laws to include a provision for damages in excess of what the companies are stealing? Make it so unprofitable that companies have to be good corporate citizens? Say an additional $100 paid to each customer for each month Verizon or Sprint jacked their monthly bill from $125 to $127? Would that put a stop to it?