<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-bar-tender/2009/11/class-action-lawsuit-att-wont-refund-bogus-charges.html" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-bar-tender/2009/11/class-action-lawsuit-att-wont-refund-bogus-charges.xml" />
  <id>tag:www.chicagonow.com,2011:/blogs/chicago-bar-tender//38/tag:www.chicagonow.com,2009:/blogs/chicago-bar-tender//38.28572-</id>
  <updated></updated>
  <title>Comments for <![CDATA[Class Action Lawsuit: AT&amp;T won't refund bogus charges]]></title>
  <subtitle>Late breaking legal filings from around Chicagoland</subtitle>
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.261</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.chicagonow.com,2009:/blogs/chicago-bar-tender//38.28572</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-bar-tender/2009/11/class-action-lawsuit-att-wont-refund-bogus-charges.html" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.chicagonow.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=38/entry_id=28572" title="Class Action Lawsuit: AT&amp;T won't refund bogus charges" />
    <published>2009-11-04T22:50:18Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-04T22:50:53Z</updated>
    <title>Class Action Lawsuit: AT&amp;T won&apos;t refund bogus charges</title>
    <summary><![CDATA[A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&amp;T for alleged bogus and unauthorized&nbsp;directory assistance charges. Jeffrey Hickel&nbsp;says that when he noticed a $5.00 charge for "Network Connections USA" on&nbsp;his November 2008 phone&nbsp;bill, he called AT&amp;T who&nbsp;"claimed ignorance of the...]]></summary>
    <author>
      <name>Jennifer Fernicola Ronay</name>
      <uri>http://www.chicagonow.com/profiles/JenniferFernicola</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="breach_of_contract" label="Breach of contract" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="class_action" label="Class action" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="conspiracy_to_defraud" label="Conspiracy to defraud" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="consumer_fraud" label="Consumer fraud" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="truth_in_billing" label="Truth in billing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="unjust_enrichment" label="Unjust enrichment" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <category term="att" label="AT&amp;T" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <category term="bogus" label="bogus" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <category term="charges" label="charges" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <category term="refund" label="refund" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-bar-tender/">
<![CDATA[
      <p>A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&amp;T for alleged bogus and unauthorized&nbsp;directory assistance charges.</p>
<p>Jeffrey Hickel&nbsp;says that when he noticed a $5.00 charge for "Network Connections USA" on&nbsp;his November 2008 phone&nbsp;bill, he called AT&amp;T who&nbsp;"claimed ignorance of the charge." The customer service representative stated that AT&amp;T had been told by Network Connections to put the charge on Hickel's bill for an unspecified service.</p>
<p>Hickel then&nbsp;contacted&nbsp;Network Connections directly and learned it was a prepaid directory assistance service.&nbsp; Hickel informed Network Connections that he never ordered or authorized the service and wanted it removed from his bill.&nbsp; When Hickel reviewed all of his past statements, he noticed the $5.00 charge first appeared&nbsp;in September 2007.&nbsp; </p>
<p>AT&amp;T&nbsp;removed the charge from&nbsp;Hickel's bill but never refunded him&nbsp;for the past charges, despite his repeated demands and their promises to do so, the complaint states.&nbsp; </p>
<p>The complaint notes that billing customers for telecommunication services that the customers never ordered or authorized is known as "cramming."</p>
<p><em>Read the complaint after the jump. </em></p>
<p><em>Follow me on Twitter at <a href="http://www.twitter.com/jenfernicola">jenfernicola</a>.</em></p>
      <p><object id="_ds_14840120" name="_ds_14840120" width="550" height="450" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://viewer.docstoc.com/"> <param name="FlashVars" value="doc_id=14840120&amp;mem_id=1204063&amp;doc_type=pdf&amp;fullscreen=0&amp;showrelated=0&amp;showotherdocs=0&amp;showstats=0 "/> <param name="movie" value="http://viewer.docstoc.com/" /> <param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /> <param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /> </object> <br /> <font size="1"><a href="http://www.docstoc.com/docs/14840120/11 4 09 Hickel v AT_T"> 11 4 09 Hickel v AT_T</a> - </font> </p>

]]>
    </content>
  </entry>

</feed>

