Frontier Communications Class Action Says Internet Falsely Priced

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 class action lawsuit alleges that internet provider Frontier Communications deceptively advertised the cost of its services to new customers.

The complaint contends that, “Defendant represents to its consumers that there will be no installation charges, activation fees or other miscellaneous fees other than the advertised price of its service plans when this is in fact false.”

The Frontier Communications class action lawsuit asserts that Frontier advertises a low price for internet services, knowing consumers rely on that advertised price when choosing service providers.

That low price entices consumers to switch providers, after which Frontier hits them for a higher monthly charge as well as several fees, according to the complaint.

The class action contends that “the internet services were over seven times the advertised price.”

The false advertising class action alleges that Frontier Communications knows its initial pricing is deceptive, and conceals that knowledge from consumers. The complaint states that Frontier Communications does not provide the written terms and conditions to potential customers before they sign up.

The class action argues that the internet provider does this because it knows “many of the consumers would not have purchased or attempted to purchase these internet services” if Frontier Communications was honest in its initial pricing.

Plaintiff Dorothy Ayer states that in May of 2016 she purchased internet and a hard line telephone service from Frontier Communications.

The cost of the service plan was supposed to be $69 per month, with “no installation changes, activation fees, or other miscellaneous charges.”

However, Ayers asserts that her first bill from Frontier Communications in June was $426.55.

Ayers claims that she “felt ripped off and cheated,” and would not have contracted with Frontier Communications had she known the truth about their false and deceptive advertising.

The internet service false advertising lawsuit asserts that Frontier Communications violated the California False Advertising Act by its knowing and deliberate omissions to consumers about the pricing of its internet and telephone services.

In addition, the class action alleges that the company violated the California Unfair Business Practices Act through the same conduct.

According to the complaint, Frontier Communications’ “conduct is substantially injurious to consumers, offends public policy, and is immoral, unethical, oppressive, and unscrupulous as the gravity of the conduct outweighs any alleged benefits attributable to such conduct.”

The Frontier Communications deceptive advertising lawsuit seeks to represent a Class of all persons in the U.S. who purchased, or attempted to purchase, internet services from Frontier Communications, “and whose telephone or telephone service was advertised at a lower price than charged.”

The class action wants Frontier Communications to be required to notify all Class Members of its deceptive practices through corrective advertising. The complaint also requests damages, including punitive damages, for the Class, as well as an injunction stopping the company’s misleading advertising.

Ayer is represented by Todd M. Friedman and Adrian R. Bacon of the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C.

The Frontier Communications Internet Service False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Dorothy Ayer v. Frontier Communications Corporation, Case No. 5:16-cv-01946, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.