ADT Security Robocall Lawsuit Alleges Harassment and TCPA Violation

An ADT Security robocall lawsuit has been filed recently alleging that ADT harasses consumers with unwanted calls.

Plaintiff Dawn C. recently filed an ADT Security robocall lawsuit against ADT LLC alleging that she was repeatedly targeted with robocalls and harassed by agents of the company.

Dawn allegedly began receiving debt collection calls from ADT in November 2017. Due to the frequency and timing of the phone calls, Dawn says she repeatedly asked that the company stop calling her phone.

In her ADT Security robocall lawsuit, Dawn claims that her requests were ignored and often met with hostile responses. In one conversation, a representative allegedly screamed at Dawn “PAY YOUR BILL”. In another conversation, the representative allegedly told her that there was no way to stop the phone calls unless she paid her debts.

Dawn claims that she has received more than 30 phone calls from ADT Security since asking them to stop calling her.

“The repeated contacts were made with the hope that Plaintiff would succumb to the harassing behavior and ultimately make a payment on the subject debt. The nature and volume of phone calls would naturally cause an individual to feel oppressed, especially when such calls are placed after an individual has made it clear that the calls are inconvenient,” the ADT Security robocall lawsuit states.

According to the ADT Security robocall lawsuit, Dawn has suffered concrete harm as a result of the phone calls including invasion of privacy, aggravation, emotional distress, increased usage of telephone services, loss of cellular phone capacity, diminished cellular functionality, decreased battery life, and diminished storage space for data.

Dawn argues that the company’s behavior and practices are in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act was passed by Congress in 1991 in an attempt to restrict abusive telemarketing practices. Requirements of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act include:

• Telemarketers cannot use automated calling systems without previous consent.
• Telemarketers cannot call individuals if they have revoked their consent for telephone communications.
• Telemarketers must obtain written consent from customers before robocalling them.
• Telemarketers cannot trick customers into giving consent using a “established business relationship”.
• Telemarketers are required to provide automated opt-out mechanisms during each robocall.

Under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, victims of unfair telemarketing practices may be entitled to as much as $1,500 in damages for each violation of the act.

In her ADT Security robocall lawsuit, Dawn also accuses ADT of violating the Debt Collection Act for her home state of Texas. The Texas law states, “a debt collector may not oppress, harass, or abuse a person by causing a telephone to ring repeatedly or continuously, or making repeated or continuous telephone calls, with the intent to harass a person at the called number”.

Dawn accuses ADT of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and violations of the Texas Debt Collection Act. The ADT Security robocall lawsuit seeks punitive damages, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

The ADT Security Robocall Lawsuit is Case No. 4:18-cv-00179-ALM-KPJ in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.

Join a Free TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you were contacted on your cell phone by a company via an unsolicited text message (text spam) or prerecorded voice message (robocall), you may be eligible for compensation under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Get a Free Case Evaluation Now