I feel this is great. Class action suits only make attorneys wealthy. They cost consumers a lot of money for insuance costs.

Thank you for pointing this out on your website. The diminishment of access to the courts for U.S. citizens is overlooked by the regular media, who instead constantly promulgate the false "runaway juries" and "frivolous" lawsuit verbiage of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and it's corporate allies. The real danger is to our access to the courts and the public ignorance of this threat. Tom

I do not blame the carriers for having this clause. I as the consumer would make out better on my own. I could probably get back the cancellation fee or other charges if you chose to stay with the carrier. Where as with the class action suit you may get an option to get a credit if you come back to the carrier. The only real winner in a class action suit tends to be the lawyer especially on these smaller $ suits mentioned above.

Your rights as consumers are in danger!

When is Congress finally going to step in and make these unconscionable clauses illegal? The cell phone companies are not even the worst offender: The credit card companies are even worse.

I would like to see a scholarly, statistical study done by this website of how many class action lawsuits benefitted the lawyers more than the "victims".

It is time for class action law suits to end. Enough lawyers have gotten rich off these and most are frivilous.

I personally am tired of all the class action lawsuits. The ONLY winners are the lawyers.
However they try to make everyone feel like a "victum" that deserves monetary rewards. Then they get peanuts and the Lawyers get rich. I hope this holds up.

As a lawyer you would think this is a bad thing, no? As a consumer you would think it is a bad thing, for sure. If you were a big business you'd think it was a good thing. How do you think the current administration will handle it?

Wow...will AT&T ever get the concept of putting their customers first? Not likely...

Give the people light and they will find their way.
Thank goodness things like this are receiving illumination. Keep up the good work.

I don't think class action lawsuits have served anyone, but the attorneys. It's time to revamp to whole legal compensation system, that allows lawyers to make several millions per case, while seriously short-changing the people they're supposed to represent.

class-action suits accomplish little anyway. usually the award amounts are rediculously high, and the company appeals it and wins. then when an amount is settled upon, once the lawyers take their fees, there's much less to go around once the dust settles. you're better off just taking the company up on it's arbitration offer anyway, in my opinion. besides, if damages were ever awarded that the company considered too high, they would just file for bankruptcy, shed it's stockholders & sell itself off to the highest bidder and pick up where it left off anyway. it's just the way we do business here in the U.S. (notice i didn't say free-market?)

If you're that worried about binding arbitration, then don't sign the contract...no one said you HAVE to have a cell phone. If you need one for work, let your company sign the contract and pay the bill.

Having to pay back a few people smart enough and having the time to virtually waste on arbitration is much more profitable than being held to a legal standard nationwide.

Just how is it that skirting laws and inventing loopholes are the ideals of a "free market"? Business needs a three strikes you're out type law to help end consumer fraud and mega lawsuits where only lawyers benefit. There is no way a sound economy can be built on corporations that might fold overnight due to illegal acts. Remember ENRON

ATT is a company that has taking advantage of all customers in this case. They should be sued in a class action law suite and pay back the customers they have taken advantage of with deception. Even the yellow pages of this company does the same thing.

It is my opinion that each State Public Utility Commission should put a class action against the Cellular/PCS carriers for not providing adequate coverage to meet the growing needs of the public. The end result... Public gets a bad credit report and the Carriers get no reproof.

If this matter reaches the "Supreme Court", you may expect that the newly constructed, extremely right wing, court will rule in favor of the business interests.

Stop signing up for cell phones. It's really that simple.

It is my opinion that each State Public Utility Commission should put a class action against the Cellular/PCS carriers for not providing adequate coverage to meet the growing needs of the public. The end result... Public gets a bad credit report and the Carriers get no reproof.

Class action lawsuits are a joke! The only ones who want to keep them are the attorneys, as they get fatter from them. I have never received any significant value from any of them.

ATT&T be unfair and not looking out for its own self interest--how is that even possible. Har har, please, ATT&T doesn't give a care about any of its customers any time they can make a buck they will. If they could set precedent banning all class action lawsuits, they, as well as, many other companies would rejoice.

It's too bad that the many lawyers that have brought about frivilous and expensive class action suits have created an environment where companies protect themselves at the expense of regular consumers.

AT&T sold out to Cingular and then Rebought it back Whats with that? Absolutly no quality in the "raising of the bar" Customer Service is unheard of. Whats with that? They expect the public to settle for that mess. Not in my life time.

As usual the consumer who keeps the corporate world rotating has to foot the bill. We don't mind paying for what we want, but deception is the best seller....for corporate America

There isn't enough room in this little box to enumerate all of the things wrong with cell phone service providers. They lead the pack in poor customer service and charging fees for no service. Never again.

I worked for an airline for 39 years and feel I know what customer service should be, what we have today in corperate america is a true failure of such service, and most companys know this, especially ATT&T. thats why they want as much protection from failure as possible

Class actions USUALLY ONLY significantly benefit lawyers. Millions for lawyers, pennys for plaintifs, ultimately resulting in higher costs for the group that should be helped.

The only poeple who benefit from a class action law suit are the attorneys. This is just a ploy to gain clients and money for the attorneys.

As usual, the corporation has all the advantage. The consumer has fewer and fewer rights and is paying more and more for them. If I do not fulfill my end of a contract, i.e., don't pay my bill on time, the corporation can charge me late fees, or interrupt my services, or turn my phone off and charge me the early termination fee on top of it. If they do not fulfill their end of the contract, i.e., give me dependable service, the only way out is to pay them to fire them in the form of an early termination fee, or live with the poor service until the contract expires. Aren't contracts supposed to go both ways? Why isn't this illegal? Oh, yeah!. Nothing corporate America does is illegal, just profitable.

I understand the attitude of businesses that now take a "use our service, but we will take absolutely no responsibility for our actions" attitude. This is partially born out of dozens, if not hundreds of frivolous lawsuits.

HOWEVER, now we are faced with, as Bob pointed out, a Hobson's choice...choose the telcoms' contracts of adhesion or go without cell phone service. We, as a people, have allowed this to happen. We got complacent, we got lazy. We greedily bought up cheap cell phones with all the pretty bells and whistles and annoying ring tones and gobbled up service to the point where we can not live without them.

As a data security expert, who uses his cell phone every day, I am just as guilty. I spend $125.00 a month for unlimited calling and unlimited TXT/FLIX/PIX messaging. I, like most Americans, feel helpless and damn near disabled without my beloved little electronic friend.

More and more, Americans are tethered to their cell phones, and getting rid of land lines, thereby making us more of defacto indentured slaves to our cell phones.

In a recent article in IT Business Edge, ["According to telecom industry analysts and officials, households increasingly are ditching their land lines and using cell phones exclusively. Analysts think 2007 may be the first year cell-phone spending surpasses residential and pay-phone services."] Source:(https://www.itbusinessedge.com/item/?ci=15794)

Even MSNBC's own Herb Weisbaum fielded questions about ditching land lines in favour of cell phones. Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11926475/)

Almost all of the old style coin operated phones are now gone.

So, the telcoms have now instituted an arrogance of "Well, you don't have to pay whatever we charge, you can just go without a phone!" - And we roll over and take it.

I believe that companies (not just the telcoms) need to end the practice of contracts of adhesion. I wholehearted support the class action lawsuit in this case and applaud Public Justice for their efforts!!!

AT&T's contracts and policies can't supercede the US Constitution which guarantees "We the People" the right to due process as stipulated in three constitutional amendments.

Nobody believes that any "corporation" is doing this for the good of its customers. Corporations only care about the bottom line. As consumers we are at their mercy because if we want their goods, we will just have to bend over and accept the conditions under which they are willing to provide them. Unless, of course, we boicot companies for unfair practices, and learn to make do without their services.

Get rid of those class action lawsuits. I have been invloved with a number of them and the final settlement is less than the postage you need to send in the claim. Only the theiving attorneys get anything.

A clear case of treaty adhesion which lawyers explains
like this, you have to sign a waiver before you are hired (you waive certain rights like medical reimburse
ment/benefits). Since you need a job, a working man needs a job to subsist, You sign it wether you like it or not.

Maybe its time that limits be placed on lawyer fees for class action suits so the consumer could be entitled to more than "...worthless service credits or discounts..."

The day that the large corporations no longer have to be held accountable to the public is the day that American consumerism will be damaged beyond repair. I still have a certain loyalty to companies who treat me well. They are getting harder and harder to find in America. This is one company that would do well in this narrowing (major branding)industry to try to avoid a black eye. As a former customer who left them over this mess, I knew that it made no difference to them. After a little research to see which companies in my area used AT&T's network, (AFTER ALL FOR ANYONE WHO STILL DOESN'T KNOW, ALL COMPANIES BASICALLY USE THE SAME THREE NETWORKS!) I swithed to a less known 30 bucks a month flat fee phone. I've lost no quality at all, still have all my features and I have no long term commitment to them OR ANYONE now. I had an account with Cingular from the time I bought my FIRST cell phone until they pulled their stunt. Like eBay's latest escapades, they are too big for their own good. Sad that it shows. I hope it reflects with their investors.

...and the rich get richer, while the poor get drunk.

War for the profit of a few, an integrity-bankrupt government, utility rate increases while record profits are reaped, the feds tapping our phones, and now our inability to defend ourselves against Big Business...

Anyone interested in reviving the concept of secession?

Binding arbitration, in my experience, is not consumer friendly at all. I used it once in a claim against a US car manufacturer in the 80s (transmission failure at 51,000 miles - 1,000 miles over the warranty.) I got the feeling the arbitrer was being paid by the car company and as such, acted as an employee. I ended up paying for the repair ($1,200). I never bought a US-made car ever since. I guess the US automobile industry won a small battle, but I wonder who won the war?

Excellent, good for this action! I am tired of receiving unilateral changes to contracts from service providers. They never really tell you what has changed, they only give you more paperwork that you are left to figure out.

I agree. I delt with something kinda like this with Sprint. I just didn't pay them. I had them cancell my service and just never paid them. I won't ever give them a single dime for they way I was treated by them and their customer service. If we don't take a stand and make them pay for doing wrong then who will. That's what's wrong with America today. If you have the money you can buy your way out of anything, and it shouldn't be that way. What ever happened to the phrase, "You do the crime you do the time." As for them changing the wording of the contract during the middle of this case should be anthoer fault. That should not be allowed to happen. Why can't that be concidered tampering with eviedence or something. Our justice system and Country are being bought by the highest bidder and we are letting it happen. These big time companies are getting away with the same thing. All they are doing is rewording, and fighting against our legal system to save thier own butts from what they know good and well was wrong. If they were not in the wrong and didn't do anything wrong then why would they be fighting so hard to ban this and be changing thier wording in the contracts. Take a closer look leagal system people, uphold what you said you would for the right reasons not MONEY!!!

the only one who makes money in class action lawsuits are the plaintiff lawyers and this an other tort suits have made a "king" class of multimillioniare lawyers who in turn have tremendous influience over plitics in the USA. The class member gets $50 and the lawyers gets $10,000,000!

This country is twisted. Wake up America! It is time to take our nation back from the "ruling class".

My husband was injured in a swimming pool produced by a manufacturer who insisted it was impossible to mark depth lines on the pool liner. My husband was paralyzed and died at the age of 56 because of chronic infections resulting from his injury. After lawsuits, the industry was amazingly able to label the liner, hopefully saving lives and preventing spinal cord injuries. Class action suits save the consumer from merciless, greedy manufactures who are more concerned about their profits than the safety of their product. I may sound bitter but in the courtroom we had a young attorney and his clerk. The Manufacturer had a row of attorneys and several clerks. They could afford to pay these people but they couldny afford to print five numbers or a warning label in 1980.

So maybe the answer then is to give them exactly what they want - have each individual sign power of attorney for that purpose over to a few indiviuals who have time and are willing to go through arbitration, and make them do thousands of arbitration. After they pay their lawyers $240 or so an hour for a few days, or weeks, of preparing and trying thousands of arbitrations, a class-action settlement won't seem such a bad thing.

I do not know of a single class-action suit where the consumer recieved compensation. Lawyers have made millions, for instance name me 1 (one) single smoker whom recieved 1 (one) dollar from the tobacco industry. There were hundreds of lawyers madr millions of dollars from the class action. Maybe some of them were smokers. The same goes with most class-action drug cases.

Big Corporations can either pay class action lawsuits or heavy government fines either way the consumer must be protected from rampant and destructive capatolistic practices.

This is the first time I have visited this site. i am happy, in an age where our rights are being stripped away, where the media is pandering to corporate america and THIS administration has taken unprecedented steps toward illegal activities that there is a watchdog group to tip the balance in the consumers favor. I applaud you

Clearly changes in the nature of 'class action' need to happen to protect both consumer and company. Too often the picture that we on the ground see is a big payday for the attornies and virtually nothing for the consumer. The threat of class action seems to be used more as a club to extort big $$$$$ from the 'evil' company to enrich attornies than to actually right wrongs.
Perhaps a cap on attorney fees might help weed out abusive actions and bring balance to an unbalanced system.
In the meantime, I am encouraging my children to pursue their law degree.

People do not have to sign a contract if they do not agree to the wording of it. I have refused to sign a standard pre printed contract before and had one worded more favorably to my liking than the major companies. The bottom line is business need and want consumers business and will change the standard form in order to get your business. Americans never blindly sign an agreement if you have not read it. By signing you sign away most of your rights as what has happened in the above provision. Every major corporation has a legal team that comes up with the wording and phrase that limits the companies liability and responsibily and put most of it on the consumer who blindly signs some stupid contract.

Lets hope that the Class Action Lawsuit is not a thing of the past because without it the people who do not read contracts before they sign them will and do not have a leg to stand on.

I was involved in a class action lawsuit against a company that wires money to Mexico. Although a large amount of money was awarded, none of us were paid a penny. It was given to a charity while the attorneys retained their full share. Where is the justice in this? I already give to charity causes of my own choosing.

Do we really think that our monthly bills will not go up to cover the costs of these suits? The users of the service are paying in the long run. Class actions should be limited as well as attorney fees.

IT'S A SIMPLE FIX...DON'T SIGN THE CONTRACT.

MY HUSBAND AND I DO THE PAY AS YOU GO PLAN...WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT CHANGES TO THE PACKAGE/CARRIER.

STAY CLEAR OF ALL CONTRACTS...BECAUSE THEY WILL OBVIOUSLY BE WRITTEN FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CORPORATION...THEY WILL NOT BE FOR THE CONSUMER!!!!

WE SPENT OVER $12,000 ON OUR CELL PHONES IN 2004...BECAUSE OF THE OVERAGE CHARGES. WE SWITCHED TO PAY AS YOU GO...FREE MOBILE TO MOBILE AND FREE NIGHTS AND WEEKENDS...WE'VE SPENT LESS THAN $1000 EACH YEAR SINCE WE STOPPED USING THE CONTRACT PACKAGES.

corporate america has ruined us. This used to be a country of small business doing whats right for the customer. Now its all about lining the pockets of a few top managers and screw the customer.

I would never use ATT even if it was the last phone company in the world. When upgrading phone plan the ATT Dallas office confirmed the change however due to thier error charged me for roaming, for all weekend calls and after 7PM instead og an expected $89.00 monthly bill I receieved a $750.00 bill. After contacting their office spoke to Customer Service and the Supervisor, reponse pay-up or shut up. Finally thet adjusted the finali bill to $491.00 to prevent collectiob astion by ATT. About 5 times the actual amount. Do not nad I repeat do not sign any agreements with ATT.

This a classic case of the lawyer(s) wanting to form a class because they are the only ones who will win big. I have received mailings because I belong to a particular class in securities class actions. The class members receive pennies on the dollar, while the lawyers get fees in the millions. Who is Public Justice kidding - they don't want justice for the AT&T people, they want a big payday!!

This is another example of Corporate America, becoming a different entity than the United States of America, and clearly the enemy of the citizens of the United States of America.
Bought and sold to Corporate America, our rights, our freedoms, and what we were taught as a sense of Justice. This is OJ all over again.

This is another example of Corporate America, becoming a different entity than the United States of America, and clearly the enemy of the citizens of the United States of America.
Bought and sold to Corporate America, our rights, our freedoms, and what we were taught as a sense of Justice. This is OJ all over again.

The author misused the term "Hobson's choice". A "Hobson's choice" is not the choice between 3 bad options as in this article. A "Hobson's Choice" is a free choice were only one option is offered or a false illusion of choice. Henry Ford's choice of colors for the Model T is a classic example saying that a customer can have any color they want, as long as it is black.

I have a file drawer loaded with class action suits that I have been a part of. Each has brought me 2 to 5 dollars. These things are only another way to enrich lawyers who get millions for their trouble.
Anything would be an improvement. There has to be a way to get the affected parties all this money wasted on lawyers who havwe not even been a part of the problem.

The real issue that needs to be dealt with here is why people need to inexplicably sign a contract to get a cell-phone. Other than cell-phones and gyms there doesn't seem to be any business that gets away with this ridiculous scam whereby they make consumers pay for service they may not even want. Imagine a movie theater asked you to buy 2 years worth of tickets before you could see a single film. Or if your coffee shop demand you sign a contract making them your exclusive coffee provider for several years at a time. Cell-phone contracts are a scam plain and simple and cell-phone providers are crooks. End of story.

It is time that especially large companies do right by consumers. I hope the Judge rules in favor of us and send a message to these large companies that think we are fools. Since the 1960s consumer rights are on the decline with these arbitration clauses. It is about time we get someone to help us fight the good fight.

This ruling will have a huge impact. Cell phone companies aren't the only ones to have arbitration clauses in their contracts. What happens to consumer rights when big business can hold us all hostage?

I am one of those affected by the transition that caused this lawsuit. I had five cell phones on my family plan when this transition occurred. Service was absolutely pitiful to non-existent for the duration of the new contract we were basically forced to sign with Cingular (in spite of the fact that our existing contract with AT&T was nearly over). We complained repeatedly and received no assistance, and in spite of Cingular not fulfilling the terms of their contract to provide us with service, they would not allow us out of the contract without us paying the termination fee for all five phones. As soon as the contract was over, we switched carriers and I will never go back to either AT&T/Cingular, no matter what they call themselves. I would not pursue the issue in court, but I can definitely say that none of the options we had available were to our advantage, all of them were to AT&T/Cingular's. We were NOT alone. I don't understand why the large companies are allowed to enforce contracts on consumers when they do not fulfill the terms of those contracts themselves.

Interesting to see if class actions can be stopped. I doubt it. But more importantly, all the cell phone companies are using arbitration agreements, and that means you should too. What have you done about getting new patients to sign an arbitration agreement?

Rick

There is only one winner in a "class action lawsuit" and that is the attorney. THe company being sued loses because he pays out all the money, the consumer loses because the money is divided in so many different ways, his share is minute in value but check out the winner (THE LAWYER) and calculate his winnings. He gets the major portion of the money. So, naturally, none of the lawyers want to see the class action suits end. In the past 10-20 years, they have preyed on these corporations and have become millionaires while the people have realized precious little of the money. You might say, well, the lawyer only got 40% of the final judgement while the people got 60%. Ok, so split the 60% between 25,000 people but split the 40% between 20 lawyers. Now, if the final judgement was 5,000,000, I believe that would make each lawyer's share 100,000 while each person would receive 120.00. I rest my case.
I will say that I do believe that Consumer Protection is needed but why do we have to pay for it?

The American people have been placed in position which requires taking legal action against large and powerful companies because of greed. In this case, money is the root of all evil. Good service is a thing of the past. Telecommunication companies are just a few taking advantage of the taxpayers of this country....Oil companies are killing the people, among others..when will fairness come into the picture for the people...Attorneys are the only people in this situation receiving compensation at the expense of the people..THIS IS TRULY UNFAIR TO THE PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT THIS COUNTRY.

The worst part of this all is that you have only AT&T if you want a carrier that's compatible with the better phones from Europe. T-mobile is starting up a proprietary data band, so you pretty much have to stick with AT&T and hope they'll some day let you unlock your phone and/or use a phone you bought elsewhere on their network

While in general I believe consumers should be able to bring class-action lawsuits, I understand corporations seeking to protect themselves from these types of actions. For many years, trial attorneys have abused the class-action system through frivilous suits and forum shopping. The recent criminal convictions of several high profile class-action attorneys (like Dickie Scruggs in Mississippi for attempted bribery of a judge) demonstrate just how low the class-action bar - literally and figuratively - has fallen.
Are there cases worthy of class-action to protect consumers? Absolutely.
Have class-action attorneys used the system appropriately? Sadly, far too often not.

Sooner or later corporate America goes too far. Instead of spending time and effort to treat its customers with respect, it instead sees them an enemy to be controlled and vanquished. The best companies in America are those with the fewest exculpatory clauses. Instead of trying to hamstring their customers, they give them a good deal, treat them fairly, and avoid lawsuits, instead of trying to control what happens after.

I had a local cable company get taken by a giant who then raised rates. My deal with the local guy was a pretty good price for a 2 year term. They tried to hold to the 2 years but not the price. I canceled. They tried to charge my card - then they sued me. The judge tossed out their claim since THEY breached the contract, not me.

It happens. In my case, being a lawyer means I don't have to put up with the cost of hiring a lawyer for picayune little garbage like how these companies operate. I can't imagine that such a clause is viable in a consumer driven culture - we'll see.

i have used the "under duress" with my nama when i sign and mos people having you to sign don't know what that means. also they are in a hurry to get your signature and pay no attentionn to what you write.
fight evil with evil
dan lee wappapello mo.

i am not an uneducated dim-wit but if I saw the clause you quoted about only bringing a lawsuit individually and not as a class i simply would not have understood it. I would have thought i have never sued anyone and why would I ever need to sue a reputable company like ATT. Maybe a little niave for our litigious and unsrupulous society. I persosnally think if a contract is going to have a person sign their rights away then it should be a requirement that they fully explain that clause to the consumer. A problem for the corporations they would then have to hire employees with brains and take the time to train them, which would probably outweigh the cost of leaving the clause out.

If class action suits go away, then you have one more example of big business gaining advantage over the little guy. Rather than bogging down the court system with several smaller cases, one class action suit saves the tax payer money as well.

I've never experienced a happy moment with AT&T. Try calling their Customer Service (Laugh!) line and take a trip into their Twilight Zone.

anything that puts an end to the unethical gravy train created by the blood sucking scumbags who make up the trial lawyer industry is a wonderful thing. unfortunately, however, the left wing liberal nutcases which make up the democratic party are so beholden to their lords and masters that this country will see little if any positive change.

Class action lawsuits only purpose is to enrich the attournys that file them. Virtually none of the "plaintifs" recieve any of the settlements. In many cases the action is about somthing inconsequential and is settled only to reduce the cost of defending against the suit.

How about letting us discuss something important such as the Federal Reserve, a privately owned bank, being allowed to rewrite banking regulations? Isn't this a bit like Bush allowing the Oil Companies to rewrite the US energy policies?

The exploding cell phone business is beset by fixed costs of capital equipment amortized over years, by the ups and downs of the economy, by the eleven year sun spot cycle, by fads and fashions, etc. Reception in fringe areas may require the use of roof-mounted yagi antennas or log-periodic antennas. Important calls may not go through on a timely basis or may be impossible to receive in certain areas. Cell phone reliability is not what users accustomed to land lines have come to expect. With this scenario, cell phone companies may want to limit their liability. Perhaps a better disclaimer would work as well as limiting users' class action rights if it did not dissuade too many potential customers.

I AM INTERESTED IN THIS, BECAUSE I WAS WITH ATT WIRELESS THEN CINGULAR , AND NOW ATT WIRELESS AGAIN ....

The correct term for the dilemma faced by the customers is a Morton's Fork. A Hobson's choice is a choice between one option and none at all.

How about a Class Action lawsuit against the Federal Reserve Bank? A privately owned bank being allowed to rewrite the banking regulations smells just as badly as Bush allowing the Oil Companies to rewrite the US energy policies, don't you think?

If class action suits were limited to only the losses affected from a contract, they should remain. Unfortunately, class action suits are designed to punish a company and to make someone rich without working for it.

How about a Class Action lawsuit against the Federal Reserve Bank? A privately owned bank being allowed to rewrite the banking regulations smells just as badly as Bush allowing the Oil Companies to rewrite the US energy policies, don't you think?

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled in favor of consumers on this very issue, so I believe that based on precedent this case will most likely find such a clause unenforceable.

The clauses these companies, not just cell phone companies, but almost all companies, are adding to their contracts border on unconstitutional. They remove the right of the consumer to pursue remidies for misdeeds through the court system, and should be stopped at all costs. Don't let the government, or big business take your right to sue... in many cases it is the only power you have to fight the misdeeds of a company that harms you in some way. By the way, that is what "Tort Reform" is attempting to do as well. Big Business is trying to exempt themselves from the laws of the land, and arbitration clauses and "tort reform" are their means to do it.

This isn't new stuff. Other cases like this have been brought on behalf of consumers with a good amount of success.

As in most things, this case is a double-edged sword. While our civil justice system is an important safeguard in our free-market society, it is routinely abused by gold-digging attorneys and their clients who bring frivilous and/or unjust lawsuits. The hapless defendents often settle a lawsuit not because they are guilty, but because it is the expedient way to eliminate the legal fees or bad PR of a drawn-out case. The bad news is that we, average consumers, ultimately pay for these abuses in the form of higher product, service and insurance costs (just ask your family doctor how much of your office visit fee goes to pay for mal-practice insurance!). Our current legal system has seemingly lost it's mooring in justice, and instead has become a get rich quick scheme that benefits attorneys more than the injured parties they represent.

While I don't advocate elimination of class-action lawsuits, I would suggest 2 remedies;
1) Limit attorney fees to a realistic wage per day of involvement in the case, plus verifiable expenses.
2) Mandate that losing attorneys and/or their clients are automatically responsible for the other sides' legal fees and expenses. This provision alone would eliminate most of the frivilous lawsuits, and the weak cases that are purposely drawn out over extended and unreasonable periods of time with the sole intent of wearing down the resources of innocent defendents untill they submit to an unfair settlement.

The free-market system already has a remedy for the people who were wronged by AT&T Wireless. Those customers can simply switch to one of AT&T's competitors, and in the future they would be advised to read and understand a contract BEFORE they sign it!

I've never experienced a happy moment with AT&T. Try calling their Customer Service (Laugh!) line and take a trip into their Twilight Zone.

I am not a great fan of class-action law suits. However, the option, for consumers, is invaluable for protection from corprate abuse of the very kind in ?. That's AT&T in all its form.

Consumers are already at a tremendous disadvantage when it comes to most cell phone service providers. To remove the ability to file suit as a class will further erode any rights the consumer may have left. What has happened to the phrase "the customer is always right"? The long term contracts most of the providers lock customers into are absolutely ridiculous and unfair. How did it come to be? I'll tell you how. We as consumers allowed it to happen. The whole cell phone industry has created a "manufactured need" along with a generation of adults and children who cannot go to the bathroom without a cell phone handy. There are companies out there ready, willing and able to provide service without contracts at all. I suggest we all dump the big guys and look for the companies willing to give us customer service. After all, WE are paying.

Lawsuits serve a good, legitamate public service to society. As much as you might dislike them (especially if you are involved in one) they allow society to settle disagreements peacefully. During the drawn out process, people cool off, and the entire process is designed to make litigants feel like their grievances are being heard. This alone, prevents "blood feuds" and ensures public order.

Class action, civil suits, and malpractice suits are all needed. The "tort reform" movement is largely supported by the ignorant and the negligent at the expense of the public.

So before people post a half-ton of misinformed garbage about bad lawsuits - just remember: "If they can't sue you, they'll shoot you." It's in *everyones* best interest to have an open legal system.

I don't understand the writer's point. How is it better for these consumers better off if some plaintiff-lawyer class action mill grinds a case for two years in order to create a big legal fee? Arbitration is fast and effective. The claimant herself usually can resolve such a small claim in a matter of days or weeks rather than stoking the coffers of the lawyers for months or years. Someone needs to examine the motives of Public Justice more closely. Why aren't they taking on the gross injustices which the class action legal industry perpetuates?

Sounds like the Trial Lawyers are at it again, out to make a buck at the expense of the working man. The cost of the lawsuit will get passed along to the consumer one way or the other.

Let's see, Class action ban, no service clause, non responsibility clause, etc... Cell phone companies are all robbers. If AT&T was a company that cared about their customers it would remove these items in their contracts. Cell phone companies and airlines are the only industries that I know of that DO NOT refund for poor/nonexistant service.
I no longer fly after I was refused a refund from Delta after 9-11 and I don't use a cell phone any more after I was told that I would not be refunded for no service after the hurricanes in 2004-5

I think the bigger disappointment would be the loss of revenue for the Lawyers who try these class action cases, which could in many ways become a savings for consumers. It is way too easy to sue in this country and it needs to stop.

I know of a class action suit that netted millions for the Lawyer and the parties. None of them deserved it.

This isn't about money for the consumer. It is about fair treatment. Arbitration? Why would a large company ever arbitrate when they can simply refer someone to collections? Simple model. Break the rules of the contract, refer that client to collections, refuse to negotiate because the account is in collections, force the consumer to pay the disputed debt before even being willing to arbitrate or negotiate, and then finally ignore all attempts to discuss the issue once the money is in the door. Oh, and make sure that the dollar amounts are relatively low (but profitable) so people don't complain too loudly to their state governments.

Did I miss something? They say the contract is moot, that you have these new choices, but they hang on to the only part of the contract that benefits them.

How do they pick and choose what part of the contract they are going abide by? Either the contract is in force or it is not.

Possible class action.

I would like to convey a horror story about another industry giant, T-Mobile. My wife had a contract that she needed to cancel early, she knew she would have to pay a termination fee. She went to the T-Mobile store (Brick NJ 08723), she allowed herself to be talked into retaining the service in a hold status for $10 a month, if she still wanted to cancel after the 3 months the $30 would be credited to her cancelation fee.
On Jan 1, 10:39 A.M. she again went to T-Mobile, this time she canceled , of course they tried to talk her out of it, this is done by a represenitive in another office by phone. She received a cancelation receipt and was told she would be billed. Well about 3 weeks later we receive a bill for $261.95. We immediately went to the T-Mobile office and inquired as to why this amount was billed. The store attendant that my wife had cancelled the contract with, could not explain the charges. We had to talk with another person by phone. He explained that the billing cycle is from Dec 15 to Jan 15 and that we had to pay for the whole month even though we cancelled on Jan 1st. We told the rep this is outrageous. I then asked him to send me a copy of the contract that states this. The rep explained that it is not in the contract but T-Mobile can do this and that the day my wife cancelled, she was told verbally that this is their policy . My wife said that she never was told this and that she would never agree to such a thing. I asked again if they could send me something in writing that states this, again I was told it’s their policy and that my wife was informed of this. They pull up on a PC, a written record of the conversation that my wife had with the rep on JAN 1 and read it back. My wife will stand on a stack of bibles and swear that she was never informed of this. This now comes down to he said she said. I asked for the telephone recording for Jan 1 10:39. I was told that the recordings are only used for training. Regardless of what was said or not said , T-mobile could not produce a written policy. I refused to pay any amount and walked out. Then we started to get phone calls about payment, maybe once a day. I talked to various reps they all said the same thing that, you had to pay for the days after you cancelled the contract. What person in their right mind would pay for some thing after they cancel. After about 3 weeks of T-Mobile harassing me and I talking to about 5 different people. I sent a check for the cancelation fee and marked it paid in full, I refuse to pay any thing for the monthly billing cycle. T-Mobile continued to call about the remainder, $61.95. I finally got someone and demanded that they put on a higher supervisor. I was put on hold for about 10 min and the same person came back on . I told this person, employee I.D. xxxxxxxxx , that I had requested to speak with a her supervisor and why haven’t I been connected. She again told just a minute and I responded do not put me on hold again for 10 min. Guess who came back on the line after a few minutes , the same employee #xxxxxxx. She told me that they checked and saw that I had paid the cancelation fee and that they would waive the$61.95 charge.
I just thought I would share this, because at the time I was wondering how many other people have had this happen to them and that some one should bring a class action suit. I didn’t role over and pay but I am sure other people do pay, just to be ride of the annoyance.

Consumers all most always gets the shaft! One opinion said "congress should take action to stop these lawyers from decieving the public", what profession makes up Congress!! I also was a victim of this scam. Yes, I talked to a lawyer friend and his advice,"save your money, get another carrier".

I think that most consumers misunderstand arbitration clauses and the actual costs of arbitration. Arbitration fees can be quite expensive. It is not a cheap and easy way to sue. Yet, thousands who are ripped off by these large companies must pony up arbitration fees that often are several times greater than actual damages. Sure, you will have a person who has extensive damages from time to time, but it is the average person whose damages may be a couple hundred bucks that is hurt by compulsory arbitration. Class action suits may be derided as only making attorneys rich, which in some cases is true, but you must remember that individuals may opt out of the class settlement and the attorneys often take the case contingent. Thus, the consumer does not pay for the legal service.

For those who think arbitration is such a great and friendly forum for consumers, please do some research.

i was not aware of there being a class action suit going on . I have been fighting singular \ att about my phone bill for 2 years . They have harrased me at work every week for months . how do we get are name on the class action . My complaint was never with att . I had a problem with singular . as I had no contract with them I could not see how they could force me into buying a new contract at the same time they would not honor my old att contract .

I think the best thing would be to limit attorney fees on class actions. Allow class actions to be filed but limit fees for Attorneys to a cap plus expenses. Like a $1,000,000 cap. I think you would see a fair number of them disappear unless they have merit. I agree that the high attorney fees are an issue in this country for the rising cost of insurance. Cap the lawsuits and insurance should return to resonable levels.

Well, someone actually had a great plan: hire someone (Craig's list?) to go on your behalf and file a Small Claims Court action against AT&T ... maybe file 100 at a time. ATT will have to have an attorney come in and make a motion to dismiss based on their contract (times 100 cases). Regardless of the ultimate court judgment, they will have had to bring in an attorney in each of the 100 cases. That's some serious money ... and of course, ATT can't ask to have all the small claims joined ... that would be akin to a "class action". :)

After the judge rules (perhaps) that the contracts call for binding arbitration, have our Craig's List agent handle those as well. I could probably find a guy willing to do each one of these actions for $10-$20 each (for a couple of grand, spread among 100 people) but it would cost ATT thousands upon thousands of dollars in defending the litigation (in Small Claims court, if the defendant doesn't show up, summary judgment happens for the plaintiff, so they're going to have to show up, or start paying the small claims judgements)

The beauty of the plan is to make the company PAY for it's policies. If this happened (100 cases) in every city ... their policies would indeed change.

Class action suits are only for greedy attorneys. They should make them illegal. Or better yet, keep them legal but limit attorney fees to no more than the loss of one person in the suit. Give them $5 for suing AT&T on behalf of everyone. Now that sounds like Public Fairness

No doubt class action suits require reform. But to allow what is, in effect, immunity from class action is absurd and will allow corporations to defraud as long as the damages of the fraud to each party are low enough to make individual legal action less-than-economically viable. Instead, Congress should alter the way classes in class action suits are formed: e.g. require opting in rather than opting out of a class of plaintiffs. This would reduce the abuse by attorneys who feign to advocate for their clients, whom they have never met.

"As a lawyer you would think this is a bad thing, no? As a consumer you would think it is a bad thing, for sure."

I see it as a cure for the consumer, most definitely not a bad thing. Time and time again people end up screwed when suckered into class action suits. Individual claims have always been far more effective and consumer friendly, while at the same time making frivolous cases more difficult. This is something which should have been done a long time ago.

I think of all the types of lawsuits out there, class-action suits should remain in order to protect a large group of people against those who feel they are beyond the law. If you tell me that a person can file their own lawsuit and get FAIRLY treated in the courts versus a HUGE corporation with their armies of lawyers, think again--there is strength in numbers!My wife and I just received a settlement from a class-action suit and believe that this is the only way for an aggrieved group of people to get justice.

Also, arbitration tends to cost as much as litigation. And, arbitrators have an incentive to side with industry: after all it is industry, not the consumer, who stands to re-hire the arbitrators.

It is ridiculous to have these provisions in a contract. The consumer is expected to not read the back of the piece of paper he/she is signing. If all consumers did read this when they signed up for a contract it would take an outrageous amount of time, and most people, even lawyers, would not understand it anyway.

To have this provision in the contract is threatening the right of the consumer to be heard and get a judgment against a company that is abusing this advantage that they have in negotiating. What else are consumers going to do? To not get a cell phone is not the answer- today it has become nearly a neccesity. Class action lawsuits give an oppertunity for consumers to hold large companies accountable. Contracting out this right is infuriating.

Lawyers keep all the money? So what? Anything that prevents the companies from expanding their "rights" at the expense of their customers is a good thing. In a truly free market, I could simply choose a different carrier but FCC policies, set by the mega-corps, prevent a free market. Thus, other means of protecting our position are needed, even if the monetary gain all goes to the lawyers (and no, I ain't one!)

Let me summarize: Executives(cronies),and Lawyers are immoral, greedy,and worthless. They do not create, build, or service ANYTHING. They just STEAL your money (ENRON, SPRINT, TYCO, ATT, JPMChase, etc) either directly or by creating burecratic(cronies)agencies that do NOTHING but give paychecks to nonworking people who, again, do not create or build, or service ANYTHING. PUBLIC JUSTICE IS GREAT!! I APPLAUD YOU, THANK YOU!

Yes, do away with class action law suits,instead use something like the anti-trust law where victums are awarded triple damages by a court.

While certainly lawyers can be highly compensated for class actions, lay people are generally unaware of the time, effort and risk plaintiff class action lawyers take. Class actions aren't cheap to pursue and many will result in no fees at all, but be dismissed. As to consumers, it is true that sometimes the "reward" of such suits is small (but hopefully not in relation to the individual damage -- the whole point of a class action suit is to recover many small damages that wouldn't be individually pursued). I agree that other times the recovery may be truly "worthless" to most consumers. Still other times consumers benefit significantly, but because they don't get cash in the pocket, they don't see the "real" benefits. For example, years ago, a certain land line company started charging every telephone owner $5 a month for inside wire maintenance unless the owner sent in an "opt out" request that was hidden in an insert (one of a zillion pages) in the bill. Needless to say, few opted out, and most paid the charge for months. The law was clear that opt out contracts like that were illegal, but who would pursue that enough to make the company stop? Only a class action. The result of a class action was a settlement that put some money back in the class' hand by way of credit and a good bit in lawyers' hands to for many thousands of hours of work. But the more important savings: the company stopped billing all its customers that $5 a month forever unless the customers told the company they wanted that service. That's big bucks to the consumers but not ones they would really notice.

It's too bad that many posters here have absolutely no idea what a real class-action lawsuit is for. It's a sad day when someone is willing to give up their rights because they have a knee-jerk reaction about "greedy lawyers". There are literally hundreds of books regarding corporate abuses that were only exposed to light and damages paid to litigants because a law firm actually took the risk and pursued it in court with no guarantee of payment to themselves.

I love the fact that people can file class action law suits, and I get in on everyone that I can. AT&T are dirty. I had a phone with them several years ago, when they sent me the phone they stated no contract, I went over my minutes and could not pay, they tried to stick me with a contract. Somebody need to teach them a lesson. If they go broke so be it.

How else can you punish a corporation for bilking millions of consumers other than by bringing a class action lawsuit. These companies know that they can get away with cheating each customer out of $100 and it's too expensive for the customer to sue them for it.

There's a reason why our rules of civil procedure allow class action lawsuits-- it benefits the people who are damaged by a much richer corporation's acts. Otherwise we ALL would be left without remedies simply because we don't have as much money as companies like AT&T.

Corporations love it that class action lawsuits have a bad reputation. Then the citizens don't care that they can get their corporation-friendly laws in place, screwing you in the process.

AT&T is not the only one trying to do this Get out of Jail card for free thing They all are. We know the courts are comprimised and do not understand the law as intended. We all know that the only real way to stop this insanity is to just take your money to a differnt company. remember MA BELL? Shes back! and more shrewed. If the feds broke her up due to improper bussiness practices once. how much more so will that apply today?

Customer service today means that the customer will get serviced (screwed) appropriately (for the company's benefit) and the lawyers will make out like a thief (as always). Gotta love it - you get screwed for nothing!!

Perhaps if the 'bad choices' were bad enough, AT&T's customers would leave. That's how capitalism works, afterall. Those who decide to stay should feel pretty silly, turning to some class action suit to recoup some portion of $5-175. I'm one of the customers who stands to benefit, if such a class action suit was to go through. But for a few dozen bucks, a large portion of which will line some lawyer firm's pockets? Please.

Clauses like this should be put in the public eye, and serve to warn customers away.

While I agree with a lot of people here that class action suits have been abused, and have mostly made lawyers wealthy, I think the possibility of them can be a powerful tool against companies who treat their customers badly. Individually, a handful of customers filing suits in small claims courts are only annoying little gnats to a large company; the threat of a protracted class-action suit, with all of the expense, time and bad PR that accompanies it, can go a long way to making a corporation re-think its behavior.

I also think that forcing consumers into arbitration and making them waive their rights to legal redress is really frightening, and I don't understand how companies have been allowed to get away with it. Until our government decides that people deserve more rights than companies, we'll continue to fight a losing battle.

I think the clause should stand. If you don't like the clause, don't sign the agreement. 'Class Action' means big bucks - not for the consumer - but for the lawyers. Small Claims court, and arbitration, will get the wronged consumers more relief, anyway. If it's 'too cumbersome' to go through the process, then it must not be too important to you. The problem with 'the system' is that too many people don't want to take personal responsibility for thier actions, and 'class action lawyers andfoundations' use that to make money for themselves -- not for the individuals they profess to "serve".

Why would anyone join a class action law suit? No one except the lawyers will make more than minimum wage for your efforts. The research you need to establish yourself in the class is much better spent elsewhere, even fishing. Is doesn't take a lot of these class actions to figure that out.

For those saying, just use the non-contract pay as you go phones.... Guess what? You still get a ABA.

At least as far as AT&T's GoPhone, the Terms of service has a disclaimer "PLEASE NOTE: This Agreement requires the use of arbitration to resolve disputes and otherwise limits the remedies available to you in the event of a dispute.
"

ABA's are just ridiculous. As for the lawyers getting all the proceeds. We have a public defender's office, why not buff it up and have class action groups use public defenders with a guide line to profit generation limits.

The latest joke is customer service that is outsourced to India. They know nothing and can't even speak English correctly. They have no authority and will never,ever correct anything. One idiot could not even understand that the same numbered airline ticket for the same person on the same flight and the same day should not be billed twice!!! I think they have talking monkeys not men in those outsourced customer service centers. Money saving? only for the unconcerned companies that should be boycotted!!!

It's not a question of not signing contracts. Sometimes we HAVE TO sign contracts. Otherwise, you can't own a home, buy a car, get a loan, etc. And it is true that attorneys are the only ones who make "real" money from class action

The issue is that companies are permitted by law to
put language in CONSUMER contracts that prohibits class action. Such language should only be permitted in business-to-business contracts, where both parties are assumed to be knowledgable or have ready access to substantial resources ($$$) to obtain that knowledge (hire a lawyer). A consumer has neither of these at his/her disposal.

Class Action Lawsuits are the only effective voice you have in the judicial system and many of you are so ignorant that you would want to do away with YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS to appease the corporations. Suppose your child or spouse were injured or killed by a faulty medication due to a pharmaceutical companies negligence. Without class action suits, what would you do, call your local attorney? How would you pay them for their time? Do you think that you and your local attorney could get anywhere with a suit against a pharmaceutical company? They would eat you alive and tie you up so long that you would go broke. A Class Action Suit is the only way to hold corporations responsible. Class Action attorney's do make a lot of money in final judgments but do all of their work on spec. They do not receive any compensation for their thousands of billable hours until a settlement is reached. You are also so ignorant that you think consumer prices are influenced by these lawsuits. Know this fact, pricing is set not just by costs, but by what you are willing to pay.

Like most corporate giants, AT&T is not interested in the concerns of its customers. You pays your money and takes what they give you. On the other hand, I have been associated with several class action suits and never ever got anything worthwhile out of one, while numerous attorneys got millions. This is really a game between the legal profession and corporate America, where consumers are just an incidental vehicle to be trashed at the end of each event. On more than one occasion I have received a check for less than ten cents as my share of a class action settlement. And on other occasions, I have been offered the chance to submit voluminous proof of class membership in hopes of receiving a pittance. Let's hope the courts do away with class actions suits forever.

I think it's ironic and wrong when people deride lawyers for bringing class action lawsuits. Why? Hundreds of huge companies use the following strategy: nickel and dime each customer for $10-20. That amount isn't enough to make it worth the individual to fight, bring suit, etc. So, the company makes $20 each, time a million customers, and laughs all the way to the bank. The ONLY THING these huge companies are afraid of is class action suits! Certainly, allowing lawyers to take 35-40% of the recover is ridiculous, but to simply complaint that "all" class actions are bad is sillier. Without them, big companies would simply screw consumers even more. I think of class actions more of deterrent. After all, the $1.45 settlement each consumer gets is worthless, but it scares some companies into acting responsibly. I don't know how you can seperate the bogus claims from the real ones, but certainly "banning" all class actions and whining about how "bad" they are is NOT the answer.

I am politically conservative, but I can not stand on the conservative side of this issue which is against trial lawyers. This is another case of big business trying to get richer off of the backs of the consumers.

Most people cannot afford to go to arbitration. It costs too much and lawyers will not do it because they cannot legitimately cover there cost for smaller claims.

Class action lawsuits protect the citizenry from corporations who will harm them in order to make a profit. Go watch Erin Brockovich or look to the lawsuit with Ford and Firestone who put tires on their SUV's that could cause rollovers during normal operations. If it was your wife or child in that vehicle wouldn't you want this valuable tool in order to recover damages for their negligence.

We had a lot of talk about tort reform to make health care more affordable a few years ago. Has health care become more affordable? No, because the doctor's malpractice insurance rates are still going up at the same rate. The insurance companies are getting richer by limiting the courts.

We also hear about courts legislating from the bench. This does happen, but most of the time it is because lawmakers purposely write vague laws that the judges are left to make sense of.

Taking away the power of the people to protect themselves is never a good thing.

If you do not like class action suits against companies, i recommend you move to China.

An even better idea would be to ban all class action lawsuits. It would be a long step in bringing down insurance costs and putting a lid on greedy lawyers.

Class action lawsuits do seem to financially benefit the lawyers more than the individual consumers. But that is not the only reason for class action. If I negotiate a $30 settlement on my own, the company will not change their practices. But if they must pay a $20 million class action, they will most likely change their practices. It is punitive, to force them to change.

I am really hard pressed to understand the histrionics in many of the preceeding messages,

For starters, "We the people had the right to due process" - Nothing prevents an individual from seeking redress, and arbitration seems to be a quick, inexpensive and fair procedure.

However, the comsumer has the ultimate weapon when he places his business. Unhappy with AT&T? Don't use them in the future! Think Wal-Mart in unfair to unions? Shop at Target! Companies are in the business to make money. If enough customers shop elsewhere, they have no choice but to change their practices. Free Market, remember?

I agree with many of the people that say that class actions primarily benefit the lawyers. Why else the endless ads on TV and radio from lawyers looking for clients they can add to their class-action suits?

So, let's take them on as individuals. Think about it, thousands of lawsuits to tie thm up for years. Not one, thousands. That will cost them more in fees than a "class". Take them on America!!!

My solution is to first get rid of all the lawyers.

That will take care of the problem of class action suits as well as much of what is wrong with our society.

How many class action 'victims' are driving around BMWs and Mercedes? How many class action lawyers? The lawyers are in business to make money - which they do - not serve the public!

"I feel this is great. Class action suits only make attorneys wealthy. They cost consumers a lot of money for insuance costs."

I feel you should look up the definition of a class action lawsuit prior to speaking ....

Moving on, I hope the judge sides with the consumers on this one. Cingulair / ATT is known for bad customer service and to have them entrap people into their contracts definetely justifies this class action suit.

When the ATT/Cingular merger occurred I was on an AT&T prepaid plan. I set up my credit card to be charged every month to take advantage of rollover options available. I had over 400 minutes available when Cingular cut off my service without notice and refused to re-instate my minutes.

Needless to say I never went back.

I switched to Sprint-and I have had problems with them too. One thing I have learned - do not do business with their telemarketers who are supposedly calling with plan upgrades, they mis-represent the savings and then create new accounts instead of upgrading the existing ones.

I also have high-speed internet access with Sprint, and I have to watch my bill because they charge me for minutes on weekdays - on an unlimited access plan. I looked all over the contract and no where did it state I would pay a 20 cent per minute for weekday usage. One time they even billed me for 24 hour access for a full month after they killed my wireless modem by sending me a KNOWN bad firmware upgrade and it took 2 months to get them to replace it at no charge.

If class action suits are so bad why are big companies so afraid of them. What these suits do accomplish is to change the policies and actions of the big corporations that think they can get away with anything.

It still amazes me how many stupid people there are in this country who continue to make Lawyers fat dumb and happy at our expense. I have been robbed in every class action law suit I have been in. This happens only in America. Wake up you idiots. We are the only country in the world with this percentage of Attorneys. Figure it out people.

The ever famous scare tactic that lawsuits only result in higher insurance. People should be reminded that the market and competition determine the price of services, not lawsuits.

I am having a similar problem w/ Sears. They have just put me through hell and because they have a similar clause in their svc. contract they believe they do not have to be accountable to the consumer (me being one of them). Needless to say I will not be buy anything from them anymore or K-Mart or Autonation which is all owned by the same company. I currently have a small claim against them in court. As far as the cell phone svc. providers, I've always said the gov't should get involved. It's a racket. I should be able to go into a store and buy a cell phone for a reasonable price (just like a phone for my home) and not have to renew a contract that has all these strings attached and higher monthly charges. If I don't sign a contract I am paying a much higher price for the equipment. How are they allowed to get away with it?

When are we, as consumers, going to actually read what we sign and if we don't like it, go elsewhere. Get some cojones and just say no if you don't like it. Stop being sheep, and expecting someone else to come to your rescue later.

No on has a 'right' to cell phone service. You don't like any of the wireless provider's contracts?? Use the mail. Or Vonage IP phone service.

Everyone do yourself a favor and read "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein. It's well worth the read!

I recently refused to initial the "binding arbitration" clause on an application for an employment agency. In fact, I crossed it out. I find it highly likely I'll never hear from them again.

Class action lawsuits profit only lawyers. Binding arbitration profits only the company which demands it, unless you somehow get very, very lucky and the company uses a public ombudsman rather than one of their own employees (which should be illegal, incidentally... Something about "conflict of interest"...).

Basically, under the "loving" tutelage of the Demunist party over the last 30-odd years, Americans have sold their rights for a mess of "Big Nanny will take care of you" pottage, and now everyone is paying for it.

Cingular was acquired by AT&T, not the other way around, as it says in the beginning of the article. I know because I had a cingular phone & now it's under AT&T.

It does not really matter the cell phone companies find one way or another to shaft the consumer. For example on my last contract we got phone for cingular service but reception would not work in my home area. Contacted cingular and they sent me finally a return label and auth. When I sent phones back they said they were received back to late and would not issue us a refund for the 3 phones and they kept the phones. I called cingular and ATT as this happen just as the take over was occuring and neither one would help me with the issue. Do not believe a single word cingular/ATT tells you for your own good.

I can't believe how some of you buy into the corporate spin. It doesn't matter whether the individual consumers get anything or whether the lawyers are the ones getting rich. What matters is having lawyers motivated by self-interest as pit bulls guarding the rights of the consumer against corporate bullying and exploitation. It helps keep big business accountable, and that benefits everyone.

To all of you 'smart people" out there who don't know that attorneys do not get paid unless they win, I would say you will lose every law suit you file.

I have been involved in a class action suit after I was defrauded be my mortgage company. I would NEVER have been able to collect damages had it not been for the ability to band plaintiffs together. If they do away with class action you might as well do away with any rights you have as a consumer. No one is going to hire a lawyer to sue for $100 you will just take the beating and walk away. Band 1000 angry customers together and maybe you have a slim chance against corporate America.

I can't believe the number of people commenting here that this is a good thing, "you don't need a phone", "lawsuits never help or are useless" etc...

Do you all work as CEO's for corporate America, or just wish you could and want to live vicarioiusly as one of them by taking a dumb stand?

Bottom line: NO contract should ever include the ability to remove your legal rights. If it does, what is to stop mortgage brokers from adding a clause stating "should you miss a mortgage payment, you will become an endentured servant to us for your remaining days, ie slave"... I'm sure the same short sighted wannabe CEO's on this forum would just say "well you don't NEED to buy a home".... wake up and start demanding the rights the founding fathers bestowed upon us all...

As a person who does not believe in lawsuits for the most part, watching my parents file so many that I thought were frivilous even as a child, I have filed 1 and only 1 lawsuit in my entire life to date due to a car accident. The only reason I filed that one in the first place was due to the driver of the other vehicle (a motorcycle) had stolen the bike and was speeding in a school parking lot. I had minor injuries, but it was the point that this young may (17 years old) needed to be held accountable for his actions. The juvinile court judge called me personally and asked if I was filing for retribution. I said I was and she said "Good" these kids need to learn that they can't get away with things just because they are a juvinile.

I was awarded $15,000 for damages of which I personally received a check for $5,600. I couldn't believe how much the attorney's took as their portion. I agree something needs to be done about lawyers fees. I understand they have to make a living too, but it should not be at the cost of those they are representing.

As a person who does not believe in lawsuits for the most part, watching my parents file so many that I thought were frivilous even as a child, I have filed 1 and only 1 lawsuit in my entire life to date due to a car accident. The only reason I filed that one in the first place was due to the driver of the other vehicle (a motorcycle) had stolen the bike and was speeding in a school parking lot. I had minor injuries, but it was the point that this young may (17 years old) needed to be held accountable for his actions. The juvinile court judge called me personally and asked if I was filing for retribution. I said I was and she said "Good" these kids need to learn that they can't get away with things just because they are a juvinile.

I was awarded $15,000 for damages of which I personally received a check for $5,600. I couldn't believe how much the attorney's took as their portion. I agree something needs to be done about lawyers fees. I understand they have to make a living too, but it should not be at the cost of those they are representing.

The pigs are at the trough and feeding heartily. Corporations seek to eliminate their accountability so they can do whatever they please in the name of increased profits. In the meantime the typical citizen has been disenfranchised from civil judicial remedies because it takes money to go to court. As unconscionable as class actions suits sometimes seem (there are abuses, but not to the amount and degree portrayed by corporations) they are in fact a necessary tool to keep these folks behaving in an ethical manner (I would have said behaving honestly, but that implies they are honest people which all the corporate fraud that continues to emerge proves is not the case). The average citizen's rights have eroded under the corporate leadership from the current administration in the white house, and our democracy is imperiled by runaway capitalism. Just because our country adopted a free market economy does not mean capitalism is the end all ideal of American democracy, but the neo-cons have increasingly sold this idea, through deceit and subtrafuge, to a disturbingly large portion of the average citizenry. We are in danger of America having a small, moneyed elite, essentially an aristocracy, who rule over an enormous underclass who are permanently under the yoke of economic oppression. This needs to change or our republic will fail to fulfill the potential our founding fathers meant for it.

Bravo Mike. Well said. The ignorance of some on the role of class actions in our system is astounding.

My only comment is will the individuals typing here for the benefit of large companies take their comments elsewhere". We all know you are paid to monitor these sites and present a:

"I'm against it, because the lawyers get rich" or
"you can get a better deal by arbitration"

and more times than not you can spot them because they don't leave a name or city.

For the rest of the name signers with the same attitude, you don't understand how the courts work within the Law, otherwise you wouldn't be trying to one of the few consumer weapons available today.

Why put the clause in their contracts at all? If someone wants to opt out of a class action suit, it is permissible. Anyone who does not want to be a part of a class action suit is able to opt out and to pursue whatever avenue they so desire. Why does AT&T feel the need to restrict options for its customers unless it is to THEIR advantage? They are definitely not doing this for the consumers benefit, and trying to claim such is ludicrous. Restricting the oft times exhorbitant lawyers fees would be an option before restricting the redress of the consumer.

Perhaps I can help guide some of the folks who are having issues with AT&T to folks who can help. Feel free to contact me if you have questions or are interested in very effective asssitance.

1. This would only end class action lawsuits from class plaintiffs that have signed contracts. Not all class actions (cigarettes for example) stem from contract situations.

2. Recently the trend has been against upholding such provisions in contracts of adhesion (meaning the customer has no real leverage to vary the terms of the contract he agrees to). For instance, arbitration clauses have been sometimes found une