Altice Dupes Consumers With Hidden Internet ‘Junk Fee,’ Alleges Conn. AG
Altice for at least the past five years has charged Connecticut consumers a monthly “network enhancement fee” (NEF) that it has “misrepresented the nature and purpose of,” alleged Connecticut Attorney General William Tong (D) in a complaint Monday in Hartford…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Superior Court that alleges deceptive advertising and billing practices. The complaint alleges that Altice also didn’t specifically disclose NEF increases to consumers, but instead disclosed and increased the NEF at the same time as general rate increases. The NEF is thus nothing more than a hidden “junk fee,” said the complaint. Altice advertised a price for internet service that didn’t include the NEF “but actually charged many of its Connecticut customers a higher price that does include the NEF,” said the complaint. In this way, Altice was able to advertise “an artificially lower price” for internet service, it said. The complaint also alleges that in certain ads for Altice internet services, representations about Wi-Fi speeds and additional fees “are not clear and conspicuous,” it said. In certain TV ads, certain disclosures about Wi-Fi speeds and limitations on Wi-Fi speeds “were provided in gray text on gray backgrounds making them nearly impossible to read and appeared on the screen only for fleeting moments,” said the complaint. In certain web-based ads, certain disclosures about internet speeds appear only on the second pages of the ads in extremely fine print, it said. In certain direct mail ads, speed disclosures are in extremely fine print on the back of the mailer, it said. Consumers are led to believe that by selecting and paying for a certain speed of internet service, that they will receive this speed of service, when this isn’t always the case, it said. The complaint alleges three categories of violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, including the improper NEF, inadequate speed disclosures and English-language disclosures on Spanish marketing materials. The complaint seeks payment of restitution for consumers, plus penalties to the state.