CenturyLink Class Action Says Customers Promised One Rate, Charged Another

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 claims that CenturyLink promises customers one rate but charges them another.

Plaintiff Jason Malueg alleges that CenturyLink, a major telecommunications company, uses fraudulent sales practices to entice customers into signing up for its services only to routinely charge those same consumers much more than the promised price for services. According to Malueg, this is a company-wide practice.

The CenturyLink false advertising class action lawsuit claims the phone company also tacks on extra, unauthorized charges during billing, and refuses to acknowledge discrepancies, brushing off consumer concerns as “billing disputes.”

According to Malueg, this practice results in a profit of tens of millions of dollars annually for CenturyLink, which represents unjust enrichment and fraudulent business practices on the part of the company.

The CenturyLink false advertising class action states that the practice of misleading consumers is part of a “uniform business model,” as evidenced by the training and instructions given to sales offices and employees.

Allegedly, CenturyLink’s customer service representatives are really salespeople, and are given the task of meeting “draconian sales quotas and revenue targets through any means necessary.”

The CenturyLink false advertising class action lawsuit claims that the company incentivizes sales representatives to make a sale in any way necessary — even if this means promising a rate that the company had no intention of following through on, and uncharging the consumer later.

Additionally, the sales representatives are allegedly encouraged and incentivized to brush off consumer complaints about this practice.

The CenturyLink rate discrepancy class action lawsuit claims that “CenturyLink’s chosen business model yielded predictable results by encouraging and rewarding deceptive and other unlawful conduct.”

In support of Malueg’s claim that this practice is consistent throughout the company and not just a fluke or a single instance of bad customer service, he states that thousands of consumers have put forth complaints of virtually the same unlawful and unethical practices of the sales and customer services departments.

Consumers around the country have allegedly reported “being promised one rate during the sales process but being charged a higher rate when actually billed” and in other cases, sometimes in addition to the aforementioned practice, “being charged unauthorized fees, including billing for services not ordered, for fake or duplicate accounts, for services ordered but never delivered, for services that were canceled, for equipment that was properly returned, and for early termination fees.”

Malueg claims that he and many other consumers were financially injured by CenturyLink, because they did not receive the promised benefit of the service they were sold, and were unable to determine the value of the services they were charged because another value had been advertised.

Additionally, the CenturyLink false advertising class action lawsuit states that the company’s practices are fraudulent and misleading.

Consumers have no choice but to trust the advertising and statements put forth by the company in making their purchasing decisions, but are unable to make wise decisions because the information they’re given is inaccurate, Malueg claims.

CenturyLink False Advertising Class Action Lawsuits

CenturyLink has faced numerous false advertising class actions over the years regarding billing practices. 

In addition to the bait-and-switch scheme allegations, some customers say CenturyLink goes as far as “victim-blaming” when consumers call to complain about not discovering added charges on bills.

One screenshot conversation mentioned in a recent CenturyLink class action between a customer service rep and a customer named Nichole states the following: “Nichole, I understand your frustration, but at the same time it’s also the customer’s responsibility to look at their bill. That’s why you are sent one.”

Another CenturyLink class action was filed after The Oregonian reported on unlawful billing and issues regarding door-to-door sale tactics.

“CenturyLink’s unlawful billing tactics in Oregon include billing customers for services they never requested, billing higher amounts than quoted during sales calls and door-to-door sales campaigns, billing customers for hidden fees when they canceled their services due to the higher amounts they were being billed, billing customers for periods of service before service was connected, and overbilling customers for returned equipment,” the Oregon CenturyLink class action states.

In addition, CenturyLink is facing class actions regarding pulling credit reports on customers who inquire about the service in violation of the federal Credit Reporting Act.

Malueg is represented by Richard M. Hagstrom, Anne T. Regan, Nicholas S. Kuhlmann, and Jason Raether of Hellmuth & Johnson PLLC.

The CenturyLink False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Jason Malueg v. CenturyLink Inc., Case No. 1:18-cv-00725-WCG, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.