DirecTV Customer Fights Billing Privacy Class Action Arbitration

A DirecTV consumer recently fought the television company’s arbitration bid, arguing that cited arbitration clauses in consumer agreements illegally limit rights to seek remedies and cannot be enforced.

Plaintiff James Jantos asked a federal court to keep his DirecTV class action alive by stating that arbitration clauses found in consumer agreements signed as a part of his services wrongfully limit his ability to seek compensation through legal means.

Jantos’ argument follows a DirecTV bid for arbitration outside of court.

“DirecTV’s attempt to eliminate Jantos’ remedies […] violates both federal and state law: The federal doctrine of effective vindication precludes enforcement of the clause, as does Washington state law’s doctrine of unconscionability,” Jantos’ response read.

In May, DirecTV and CenturyLink, moved to force the case into arbitration, claiming that arbitration clauses in Jantos’ consumer agreements supported the bid.

Jantos argues that the arbitration clauses are unfair and are also not applicable because the consumer agreement documents were sent to a discontinued email address.

The plaintiff filed the DirecTV class action lawsuit in March, alleging that DirecTV and CenturyLink made consumer bills available to the public. He claimed that this was a violation of Communications Act and that his personal identifying information was available with a quick Google search.

Jantos was a DirecTV consumer with a bundled subscription to internet, telephone, and satellite television. According to the DirecTV class action, Jantos was able to access his bills online, without a password, through a Google search.

The public bill allegedly contained his “name, address, phone number, phone numbers that he had called and received calls from, and his DirecTV/DirecTV LLC billings.”

Personal investigation into the alleged breach of privacy showed that other people could also see his personal identifying information. Jantos also reportedly found that other consumers had their information similarly compromised, hinting towards a widespread practice of revealing personal consumer information to the public.

The DirecTV class action lawsuit argued that the public display of this information was a violation of the Communications Act. The Communications Act prohibits the disclosure of private information by companies and put into place privacy protections which “prohibited satellite carriers from disclosing personally identifying information about a subscriber without prior consent.”

In addition to violation of the Communications Act, Jantos argues that DirecTV and CenturyLink failed to “take such actions as are necessary to prevent unauthorized access to personal information.”

Jantos seeks to represent DirecTV consumers with bundled bills, from Qwest Corp. or DirecTV, whose personal information was available to the public since Mar. 19, 2014.

The DirecTV class action lawsuit seeks actual damages (“not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100 a day or $1,000, whichever is higher”), punitive damages, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

Plaintiffs are represented by Richard E. Spoonemore and Chris R. Youtz of Sirianni Youtz Spoonemore Hamburger; and Michael D. Myers of Myers & Co. PLLC.

The DirecTV Billing Privacy Class Action Lawsuit is Jantos v. DirecTV, et al., Case No. 2:18-cv-00413-TSZ, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

UPDATE: On Oct. 12, 2018, consumers have obtained a settlement in a class action lawsuit alleging DirecTV and CenturyLink made their bills available to the public.

UPDATE 2: On June 14, 2019, the CenturyLink, DirecTV billing privacy class action settlement received final approval. Let us know on our Top Class Actions Facebook page when you get a check in the mail!