Verizon Class Action and Legal Claims for Overcharges

Title: Verizon Class Action and Legal Claims for Overcharges


Verizon, one of the largest telecommunications companies in the United States, has faced legal scrutiny and class action lawsuits over allegations of overcharging its customers. These legal actions have stemmed from various issues, including billing discrepancies, hidden fees, and deceptive practices. This page provides an overview of the Verizon class action and legal claims related to overcharges.


Verizon offers a wide range of telecommunications services, including wireless, internet, and television. As the company expanded its services, complaints from customers regarding billing errors, unexpected charges, and unclear billing practices also increased. Some customers alleged that Verizon engaged in deceptive practices to maximize profits at the expense of consumers.

Class Action Lawsuits:

Several class action lawsuits have been filed against Verizon, consolidating the claims of numerous customers who allege similar grievances. These lawsuits typically assert that Verizon violated consumer protection laws, breached contracts, and engaged in unfair business practices. Common allegations include:

  1. Billing Errors: Customers claim they were billed for services they did not subscribe to, experienced erroneous data charges, or encountered unexplained increases in their bills.
  2. Hidden Fees: Customers argue that Verizon imposed undisclosed fees, making it difficult for them to accurately assess the total cost of their services.
  3. Deceptive Advertising: Some lawsuits allege that Verizon engaged in deceptive advertising practices, promising certain rates or benefits that were not delivered.
  4. Unfair Business Practices: Consumers argue that Verizon’s business practices were unfair, exploiting information asymmetry and taking advantage of customers who may not fully understand the complex billing structures.

Resolution and Settlements:

As class action lawsuits progress, some cases may result in settlements between Verizon and affected customers. These settlements may involve compensation for overcharged amounts, adjustments to billing practices, or other remedial measures. Additionally, the court may impose fines or penalties on Verizon as a form of punishment for any proven wrongdoing.

Verizon’s Response:

Verizon typically responds to these legal challenges by defending its practices, arguing that any billing discrepancies are isolated incidents and not reflective of systemic issues. The company may also point to its efforts to enhance transparency and improve customer communication regarding billing practices.


The Verizon class action and legal claims for overcharges highlight the challenges telecommunications companies face in maintaining transparent and fair billing practices. As the legal proceedings unfold, the outcomes of these cases will shape not only Verizon’s future practices but also the broader landscape of consumer protection in the telecommunications industry. Customers affected by overcharges should stay informed about the progress of these lawsuits and explore their options for potential compensation or resolution.  Our office is handling Verizon Overcharge claim on a contingency basis.

If you believe you were overcharged for phone services, call (973) 598-1980 or cellphone (973) 479-5515 for a Free Consultation

Toyota fined $60 million for illegally bundling high-cost protection products

Toyota Financial Products Investigation

Toyota customers have complained that they were deceived  the automaker’s in-house financing services unit by buying products they couldn’t cancel, have resulted in a multimillion fine and investigation by the federal  Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

According to the charge, Toyota Motor Credit sells products, typically at a cost of $700 to $2,500 per loan, that offer protection when vehicles are stolen, damaged or require parts and service after warranties expire.

The agency said that thousands of consumers subsequently complained that dealers lied about whether these products were mandatory, or rushed the paperwork so they wouldn’t realize how much they were paying.

The regulators said that Toyota Motor Credit then “devised a scheme to retain the revenue from these products” and made it “extremely cumbersome” to cancel the added-on bundles, and failed to provide refunds to consumers who did cancel. The company, the CFPB charged, also “falsely told consumer reporting companies that borrowers had missed payments, and it failed to correct consumer reporting errors it knew were wrong.”


Toyota has not yet responded publicly to the settlement. It is among the largest indirect auto lenders in the United States, with nearly five million customer accounts and more than $135 billion in assets.

The CFPB is ordering Toyota Motor Credit to pay $48 million to harmed consumers, and pay a $12 million penalty into the CFPB’s victims relief fund.

“Toyota’s lending arm illegally withheld refunds, made borrowers run through obstacle courses to cancel unwanted services, and tarnished their credit reports,” said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra. “Given the growing burdens of auto loan payments on Americans, we will continue to pursue large auto lenders that cheat their customers.”

Odometer Tampering and Fraud Claims


When the odometer of a vehicle is misrepresented, it typically involves fraudulent practices related to the vehicle’s mileage. This can lead to various claims and legal actions, depending on the jurisdiction and the circumstances of the misrepresentation.

Here are some common types of claims and actions that can be pursued in cases of odometer misrepresentation:

  1. Odometer Fraud Claims: Odometer fraud involves intentionally misrepresenting the mileage on a vehicle to increase its apparent value or make it more appealing to buyers. In such cases, a buyer may have legal claims against the seller for the misrepresentation.
  2. Breach of Contract: If there was a written contract or sales agreement that included specific information about the vehicle’s mileage, and the seller knowingly provided false information, the buyer may have a breach of contract claim.
  3. Violations of Federal and State Laws: In the United States, the federal government has the “Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act,” which makes it illegal to tamper with or alter an odometer. State laws also address odometer fraud. Violations of these laws can lead to penalties, fines, and civil liability.
  4. Consumer Protection Laws: Many jurisdictions have consumer protection laws that prohibit deceptive trade practices. Odometer fraud could be considered a violation of these laws, leading to claims and potential legal action.
  5. Tort Claims: In some cases, odometer fraud could lead to tort claims, such as fraud, misrepresentation, or even negligence, if the seller’s actions are deemed reckless or intentional.
  6. Federal Odometer Act (FOA) Claim: In the United States, the Federal Odometer Act (FOA) allows consumers to seek damages for odometer fraud, which includes actual damages or a civil penalty up to three times the amount of actual damages, whichever is greater.
  7. Rescission of the Sale: In some cases, the affected party may seek to rescind the sale, effectively voiding the transaction and returning the vehicle to the seller while recovering the purchase price.


Call us for a Free Consultation to Discuss Your Rights.

Lear Gold Coin Deception

News media have suggested that Lear Gold coin advertisements are misleading and fail to candidly reveal substantial commissions charged by the company.

Image result for gold and wikepedia

Claims have involved misleading sales methods, overcharging even for bullion coins, and their  high commission fees.  Additionally there are allegation of:
*False or misleading claims about the appreciation of coins,
* Claims about misstatement of value, grading, and certification.


New Jersey Bait and Switch Administrative Regulations


New Jersey Bait and Switch Claims 

Legal Definitions 
Section 13:45A-26A.4 – Bait and switch
(a) The following motor vehicle advertising practices constitute “bait and switch” and are prohibited and unlawful:
1. The advertisement of a motor vehicle as part of a plan or scheme not to sell or lease it or not to sell or lease it at the advertised price.
2. Without limiting other means of proof, the following shall be prima facie evidence of a plan or scheme not to sell or lease a motor vehicle as advertised or not to sell or lease it at the advertised price:
i. Refusal to show, display, sell, or lease the advertised motor vehicle in accordance with the terms of the advertisement, unless the vehicle has been actually sold or leased during the period of publication; in that case, the advertiser shall retain records of that sale or lease for 180 days following the date of the transaction, and shall make them available for inspection by the Division of Consumer Affairs.
ii. Accepting a deposit for an advertised motor vehicle, then switching the purchaser to a higher-priced motor vehicle, except when the purchaser has initiated the switch as evidenced by a writing to that effect signed by the purchaser.
iii. The failure to make delivery of an advertised motor vehicle, then switching the purchaser to a higher-priced motor vehicle; except when the purchaser has initiated the switch as evidenced by a writing to that effect signed by the purchaser.

Sources and Related Pages 

FTC administrative decisions establishing penalty offenses concerning bait and switch sales practices:

Call for a Free Consultation on Your Bait and Switch Claim

Subaru Imprezza engine Toyota Sienna call

1 2