Cox Hidden Fee Class Action Lawsuit Headed to Arbitration

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.

A judge in a class action lawsuit alleging cable company Coxcom LLC intentionally mislead consumers about hidden fees agreed to send the case to arbitration.

Lead plaintiffs Matti Yousif, Elizabeth Ioane, Zach Beimes, and Dawn Harrell initiated the class action after noticing additional fees called “Advanced TV” fees on their Cox cable bills. They alleged that Cox’s marketing materials advertised that the price of Advanced TV was all-inclusive (except for government-mandated applicable taxes, fees, and surcharges), and that Cox had added unauthorized charges for the television cable service without the knowledge or consent of its customers.

Cox filed a motion to compel arbitration, which would force the plaintiffs to move their dispute from the California federal court. Cox argued that upon agreeing to service, the plaintiffs had 30 days to opt out of the arbitration clause in their contracts. Since the plaintiffs had entered into the service agreements in 2011 and not opted out of the arbitration clause, U.S. District Court Judge Janis L. Sammartino granted Cox’s motion and ordered the parties to arbitration.

The judge pointed out in her order that the subscriber agreement indicates “YOU AND COX AGREE TO ARBITRATE – RATHER THAN LITIGATE IN COURT – any and all claims or disputes between us . . . that arise out of or in any way relate to: (1) this Agreement; (2) services that Cox provides to you in connection with this Agreement; (3) products that Cox makes available to you; (4) bills that Cox sends to you or amounts that Cox charges you for services or goods provided under this agreement and (5) any services or goods that Cox or any of its affiliated entities provide to you under any other agreement . . . . The arbitration between you and Cox will be binding and judgment on the award rendered in the arbitration may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof.”

The class action plaintiffs argued that the arbitration clause is found in a service contract related to internet service and should not be applied to their allegations related to Cox’s billing for Advance TV fees; however, the judge pointed out that the internet service contract also contains a clause that “unambiguously” requires arbitration for claims that relate to any services or goods that Cox or its affiliates provides under any agreement.

“There can be little doubt that this arbitration clause — even though nested in an agreement geared toward high-speed Internet — encompasses claims arising from Cox’s provision of cable TV services,” concluded the judge in her order compelling the class action lawsuit to be resolved in arbitration.

The judge concluded by granting Cox’s motion to compel arbitration and finding Cox’s other motion to dismiss moot. The judge stayed the class action lawsuit in federal judicial court pending the outcome of arbitration.

The plaintiffs are represented by Derrick F. Coleman and R. Jeffrey Neer of Coleman Frost LLP and Craig M. Nicholas of Alex M. Tomasevic of Nicholas & Tomasevic LLC.

The Cox Hidden Fee Class Action Lawsuit is Yousif, et al. v. Coxcom LLC, et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-01499, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.