AOG is currently researching claims against Consolidated Smart Systems for unauthorized charges. Consolidated Smart Systems is a third-party dealer of DirecTV that manages this service for apartment complexes and other dwelling units. In these complexes, residents who want to subscribe to DirecTV must use Consolidated Smart Systems for purchases and installation. Consolidated Smart Systems, however, has been charging customers for services that DirecTV advertises as free. For example, DirecTV offers free installation but Consolidated Smart Systems charges its customers to install the satellite. It has also been reported that Consolidated Smart Systems charges customers for unauthorized fees without adequate disclosure and that it continues to charge for services after residents have moved out of the apartment complex.

The class action attorneys at Arias, Ozzello & Gignac are currently investigating claims against Consolidated Smart Systems and its unauthorized charges. If you or someone you know has been charged by Consolidated for unauthorized fees, contact our law firm today for a free consultation. 

The consumer protection attorneys at Arias, Ozzello & Gignac are currently investigating claims that M&T Bank may be assessing fees for cash withdrawals from its ATMs despite its representation that cash withdrawals are a surcharge free transaction. M&T Bank ATMs are located in numerous states and can be found at places such as Sheetz convenience stores, NOCO, Rutter’s, many Wawa stores in Maryland, Thurgood Marshall BWI Airport, General Growth Malls in Maryland, Virginia and Delaware, and certain HESS locations in Pennsylvania.

If you or someone you know is a non-M&T bank customer and has incurred a surcharge fee for withdrawing cash from an ATM operated by M&T Bank, contact our office today for a free consultation. You may be entitled to compensation.

Investigation has found that LG’s Home Theater System (model number LHB 975) may contain a defect in the wireless subwoofer and/or rear speakers. Many consumers have complained that their Home Theater Systems continued to have the same issues, even after sending them to LG for repair. If you or someone you know has purchased the LG LHB 975 Home Theater System and experienced similar issues, please contact us to discuss your legal options.

Investigation has found that many consumers who purchased ReplayTV with a lifetime guarantee of service for the life of the equipment have had the lifetime guarantees cancelled. If you or someone you know has purchased a ReplayTV unit with a lifetime guarantee of service, but later had it cancelled, please contact us to discuss your legal options.

Investigation has found that Consolidated Smart Systems, a third-party dealer of DirecTV that contracts with multiple dwelling units (e.g., apartment buildings), takes advantage of residents who are “stuck” with Consolidated by: (a) charging for services that DirecTV advertises as free (for instance, charging for installation of DirecTV even though DirecTV advertises free installation), (b) charging unauthorized fees without adequate disclosure, and (c) continuing to charge for services even after residents have moved out of the apartment building.   Residents of these multiple dwelling units are, therefore, forced to pay Consolidated in addition to paying DirecTV for DirecTV’s services. 

If you or someone you know has been charged by Consolidated for unauthorized fees, contact a California class-action attorney to discuss your legal options.

Midas, a nationwide auto-repair chain specializing in mufflers and brakes, sells Midas-brand brake pads and shoes (sometimes described as "Midas VSD" [vehicle specific design]) to its customers. However, although customers pay for the Midas-brand brake and believe they are receiving that specific, premium brake pad or shoe with a lifetime guarantee, Midas franchises actually install an undisclosed, unapproved brake pad or shoe. While Midas prohibits its franchisees from selling non-Midas brakes without explicit, written authorization, Midas nevertheless knowingly permits its franchisees to sell non-Midas brake pads and shoes but describe them as Midas-brand brake pads and shoes. The proposed putative class consists of all California consumers who purchased what were described as Midas-brand brakes but were, in fact, an undisclosed substitute. Relief sought includes injunctive relief aimed at ending Midas’ fraudulent practices and the return of all monies paid to Midas and its franchisees for the falsely designated, non-Midas brake pads.  

We are in the process of identifying new individuals to serve as lead plaintiffs and proposed class representatives. The Court granted Plaintiff's request to issue Letter Notices to a sample subset of the putative class for that purpose.

Opening utility bills in these tough economic times can be a dreaded task. We shudder before we tear open the envelope knowing rates have skyrocketed. More often than not, though, the sums on our monthly statements are justified, and we pay our bills, however begrudgingly, in order to keep our gas, power and phones in service. Every once in a while, though, the balance on a statement can seem inflated.

Citizens all across Texas noticed something fishy on their electricity bills and have now taken the state’s largest power provider to court for over billing. The lawsuit claims that Oncor Electric Delivery Co. installed defective “smart meters” that caused residential customers to be billed nearly $2,000 a month. Plaintiffs Robert and Jennifer Cordts say their already high monthly electric bills, which average anywhere between $400 and $700 per month, shot up to over $1,800 after a smart meter was installed. The ironic thing is that smart meters were designed to deliver more information to the utility company than average meters and are meant to adjust billing according to the time of day or season so that customers will actually pay less when demand is low and more when demand is high.

The Cordts say when they questioned Oncor about their ridiculously costly bills, the company interrogated them about their power habits regarding everything from Christmas lights to thermostat controls. Soon after they complained, the couple received another bill for more than $1,800. The lawsuit states that the Cordts have received three months worth of electrical bills that total nearly $5,000, an amount that deflates Oncor’s explanations of cold temperatures or additional use of lighting as the reason for the steep increases. The Cordts are seeking damages from Oncor for fraud and negligence. 

According to the lawsuit, 829,000 smart meters were installed throughout the state. Oncor’s testing of the meters has thus far provided insignificant evidence that the meters produce fair and accurate billing data, according to the Cordts’ legal team. The lawsuit also alleges that CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric has admitted that the smart meters have technical glitches and flaws that could produce inaccurate billing information.