Lawsuit Filed by State of Washington Against Comcast Goes Forward
Image: Pixabay

Lawsuit Filed by State of Washington Against Comcast Goes Forward

The company is accused of deceiving customers with add-on fees

December 29, 2016

A motion made by Comcast to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Washington State has been denied by a court.

ConsumerAffairs reports that the company is accused of deceiving consumers with add-on fees that do not deliver results that it leads the consumers to expect.

"The court correctly rejected Comcast's attempt to evade responsibility for deceiving its customers," Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson said. "Washington consumers deserve their day in court."

The trial was set for July 31, 2017.

The lawsuit alleges that the company deceived almost every one of its 1.2 million Washington subscribers with its "Comcast Guarantee." The company is accused of adding to its bottom line by tens of millions of dollars through deceptive charges.

"This case is a classic example of a big corporation deceiving its customers for financial gain," Ferguson said. "I won't allow Comcast to continue to put profits above customers — and the law."

Comcast allegedly misrepresented the scope of its Service Protection Plan, charged improper fees for service calls, and carried out improper credit screening practices.

Although this lawsuit is currently the only challenge to Comcast's policy, Ferguson pointed out that the service plan in question is a nationwide program and therefore could lead to similar charges in more states.

Comcast maintains the legitimacy of the plan and intends to "vigorously" fight the allegations.

"The Service Protection Plan has given those Washington consumers who chose to purchase it great value by completely covering over 99% of their repair calls," said Jenni Moyer, Senior Director, Comcast Corporate Communications.

The plan claims that, in exchange for $4.99 per month, customers do not have to pay a service fee if a technician from Comcast comes to their house to fix an issue that the plan covers.

Ferguson's suit claims that the company did not properly disclose the fact that repairs to any "wall-fished" wiring—wiring inside a wall—are not covered by the plan, even though this is the most common type of wiring found in homes.