Objector Urges Court to Reject T-Mobile, Asurion Class Action Settlement

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

On Tuesday, a Class Member filed an objection to a $4.2 million class action settlement over allegedly deceptive Asurion cellphone insurance plans for T-Mobile customers, claiming that Class Members were provided inadequate notice about the proposed deal and that the settlement agreement does not provide enough compensation to Class Members.

The cellphone insurance class action settlement would resolve allegations that Asurion and T-Mobile sold cellphone insurance to customers without fully disclosing the details of the policy in violation of California law. Plaintiff Wineesa Cole claimed that T-Mobile and Asurion failed to inform customers who purchased the cellphone insurance that their lost, broken or stolen phones could be replaced with a refurbished phone or a different phone that is worth less than the cost of the deductible.

Alexander Shakhnazaryan, a Class Member of the proposed T-Mobile cellphone insurance settlement, filed an objection to the deal, arguing that the attorneys would unfairly benefit from the settlement. He also argued that Class Members were not provided enough information about the fairness of the proposed settlement.

Shakhnazaryan alleges that the settlement website is inadequate because it does not provide sufficient information about the class action lawsuit and what claims Class Members would be releasing once the settlement is finalized. Further, Shakhnazaryan states that the notice does not provide an estimated amount of recovery for Class Members. Although the notice does refer Class Members to view more detailed terms of the release on the website, Shakhnazaryan says the “language is buried within legalese.”

In his objection to the T-Mobile class action settlement, Shakhnazaryan argues that the $1.9 million request for attorneys’ fees is excessive. After the proposed attorneys’ fees and other expenses are deducted from the $4.2 million settlement fund, Shakhnazaryan says the amount that would be left to distribute to Class Members would be inadequate.

Shakhnazaryan says that an estimated 1.1 million people are eligible to file claims for the T-Mobile cellphone insurance class action settlement. If all eligible Class Members file claims, they would each receive a payment of $1.43. However, he notes that only around 20,000 Class Members have filed claims, which he says proves that the settlement notice has been ineffective.

“Even assuming that no more Class Members made a claim, which would be alarming and highlight ineffective procedure of Notice, each Class Member would receive an estimated $78, which is way below the service award and Class Counsels’ fees,” Shakhnazaryan says. “The court must call a foul because even in this game, asking for such an amount where the client’s recovery is unknown is against the rules.”

Class Members of the cellphone insurance settlement include anyone who, while living in California, purchased Asurion cellphone insurance through T-Mobile between Aug. 1, 2003 and April 2, 2008. The deadline to file a claim for the Asurion class action settlement is Feb. 26, 2016.

Shakhnazaryan is represented by Joseph Darrell Palmer.

The Class is represented by Taras Kick, G. James Strenio and Thomas Segal of the Kick Law Firm.

The Asurion, T-Mobile Cellphone Insurance Class Action Lawsuit is Wineesa Cole v. Asurion Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:06-cv-06649, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.