Sprint Class Action Says Funds Debited Without Consent

A recent class action claims that Sprint debits consumer bank accounts regularly without written authorization or other authentication.

Plaintiff Catherine Hosino allegedly experienced this issue in June 2018 when Sprint debited her account for an automated recurring withdrawal of $1,3989.94. Hosino says she had insufficient funds for this massive charge.

Hosino claims that she was not a Sprint customer when the company debited her account and she had no reason to believe she owed any sort of outstanding balance on her Sprint account that was closed in November 2017.

“Based on banking records, it appears that Sprint had Plaintiff’s debit card information on file, and without written authorization, decided to attempt to automatically withdraw the entire balance through an EFT request with her banking institution without notice or authorization, written or otherwise,” the Sprint class action lawsuit claims.

Due to this unexpected transaction, Hosino submitted a fraud dispute with her bank and her account was frozen while the bank looked into the issue. The plaintiff disputes Sprint’s claims that she owes them money.

In her Sprint class action, Hosino argues that Sprint likely initiates similar transactions with other consumers despite not having consumer authorization.

“Such conduct is inherently deceptive in that it misrepresents to consumers the right to stop automatic withdrawals and results in Defendant continuing to automatically withdraw, and to potentially overdraft, Plaintiff and the Class’s accounts,” the Sprint class action lawsuit claims.

The Sprint class action lawsuit alleges that the cellular provider violates the federal Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA) by failing to acquire consumer consent before making transfers.

The EFTA was passed in 1978 to adjust to the growing prevalence of electronic banking and ATM usage. The act aimed to provide banking customers with the same amount of confidence that they had with paper checks by requiring a notice of fees, clear disclosures, and clear authorizations of transactions.

In terms of authorizing transactions, the EFTA requires that a “preauthorized electronic fund transfer from a consumer’s account may be authorized by the consumer only in writing, and a copy of such authorization shall be provided to the consumer when made.” Sprint allegedly fails to comply with this requirement by failing to get a consumer’s written authorization to debit their account.

Hosino seeks to represent a Class of individuals for whom, within the past year, Sprint initiated recurring electronic funds transfers from a debit card account or bank account number without first providing a copy of written authorization. She estimates that there are at least hundreds of individuals included in the proposed Class.

The Sprint class action lawsuit seeks actual damages or statutory damages (whichever is greater), punitive damages, injunctive relief, interest, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

Hosino and the proposed Class are represented by Todd M. Friedman, Adrian R. Bacon, and Thomas E. Wheeler of the Law Office of Todd M. Friedman PC.

The Sprint Unauthorized Charges Class Action Lawsuit is Hosino v. Sprint Solutions Inc., et al., Case No. 3:19-cv-03223-JSC, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Tropicana Class Action Says Orange Juice is Artificially Flavored

Diabetes Meds May Be Among Flesh Eating Disease Causes

Nature’s Recipe Class Action Says Dog Food Isn’t ‘Grain Free’

Cerebellar Atrophy May Be a Permanent Dilantin Side Effect