Posts Tagged ‘class action’

Facebook sued for selling personal info

August 25, 2009

“Facebook invades the privacy of its customers and misappropriates people’s images and personal information for marketing and commercial purposes, a class action claims in Orange County Court, Calif. The class claims Facebook’s “unconscionable” terms and conditions allow it to compile an extraordinary amount of data from users, and permits third parties access to a gold mine of information without users’ knowledge or consent.”

Article:

Advertisements

Chinese drywall suits filed in Nevada

August 23, 2009

“Attorneys for a group of homeowners have filed a potential class action lawsuit against homebuilders in Nevada, claiming the companies installed and used defective Chinese drywall. The complaint names US Home Corp., Greystone Nevada LLC, Lennar Nevada, Georgia-Pacific Gypsum LLC and Georgia-Pacific LLC.”

Article:

Another Wells Fargo overdraft manipulation class action

August 15, 2009

“Wells Fargo juggles accounts to extract maximum, and unfair, overdraft fees from its customers, a class action claims in Houston Federal Court.”

Article:

Another Kindle lawsuit

August 4, 2009

“A federal class action claims that Amazon is deleting books from its Kindle 2 electronic reading device after customers buy them, and ironically, the disappearing books have primarily been George Orwell’s “1984” and “Animal Farm. The class says Amazon never told customers it had the right or the ability to delete books from people’s personal property – the Kindles.”

Article:

Walgreens etc. gouge on generics says suit

July 29, 2009

“CVS, Walgreen’s, Wal-Mart and other major pharmacies overcharge customers for generic drugs, a class action claims in Hennepin County Court. Minnesota law requires pharmacies to pass along the discounts they receive on generics to consumers, but the class claims the pharmacies “routinely violate this law and … see the lower acquisition cost of generic drugs as an opportunity to generate higher profit for themselves.”

Article:

Wells Fargo sued for pocketing customer funds

July 28, 2009

“Wells Fargo takes advantage of customers who make math errors on ATM deposits by keeping the extra money even after it discovers the mistake, a class action claims in Superior Court. The “threshold amount” for the bank to snatch the money is about $10, the class says.
     Lead plaintiff Brandi McLay says that when customers make a deposit by ATM and mistakenly enter an amount lower than the amount of the check, Wells Fargo pockets the difference.”

Article:

Home Depot Rooks Managers, Class Claims

July 26, 2009

“Home Depot forces its assistant managers and manager trainees to work more than 55 hours a week without overtime pay, according to a class action in Cook County Court.

     Three named plaintiffs say Home Depot fires assistant managers or cuts their pay if they do not work at 11-hour shifts five days a week, and misclassifies assistant managers as exempt from overtime pay. This saves Home Depot “millions of dollars in employee compensation,” but happens to be illegal, the class claims. ”

Article:

Phone service sued for unrequested billings

July 21, 2009

“Mobilefunster is the latest to face a class action accusing it of charging cell phone customers for “services” they didn’t order and don’t want, in Miami-Dade County Court.”

Complaint courtesy Courthousenews

Bank and trade association aid phone scams

July 19, 2009

“The U.S. Bank National Association and National City Bank provide “essential banking services” to a payment processor that worked with fraudulent telemarketers “to raid the bank accounts of tens of thousands of consumers, many of them elderly,” according to a class action in Federal Court. ”

Article:

Babies ‘R’ Us antitrust case goes ahead

July 17, 2009

“A federal judge in Philadelphia certified a class action on Wednesday accusing a Toys “R” Us division of conspiring with baby-product makers to keep prices high in an effort to compete with online retailers.
     Faced with stiff competition from Web sales, Babies “R” Us allegedly strong-armed manufacturers into fixing prices on baby items, including strollers, high chairs and car seats. Online retailers typically have lower overhead costs and can deeply discount the merchandise and still make a profit.
     Consumers claimed the collusion between Babies “R” Us and manufacturers violated federal antitrust law and forced consumers to pay artificially inflated prices. ”

Article: