Oh no, you're thinking, yet another cookie pop-up. Well, sorry, it's the law. We measure how many people read us, and ensure you see relevant ads, by storing cookies on your device. If you're cool with that, hit “Accept all Cookies”. For more info and to customize your settings, hit “Customize Settings”.

Review and manage your consent

Here's an overview of our use of cookies, similar technologies and how to manage them. You can also change your choices at any time, by hitting the “Your Consent Options” link on the site's footer.

Manage Cookie Preferences
  • These cookies are strictly necessary so that you can navigate the site as normal and use all features. Without these cookies we cannot provide you with the service that you expect.

  • These cookies are used to make advertising messages more relevant to you. They perform functions like preventing the same ad from continuously reappearing, ensuring that ads are properly displayed for advertisers, and in some cases selecting advertisements that are based on your interests.

  • These cookies collect information in aggregate form to help us understand how our websites are being used. They allow us to count visits and traffic sources so that we can measure and improve the performance of our sites. If people say no to these cookies, we do not know how many people have visited and we cannot monitor performance.

See also our Cookie policy and Privacy policy.

This article is more than 1 year old

FTC wants AT&T to kick in $4bn to help balance US budget. Why? Some dodgy ads or something

Telco's TV biz accused of false advertising by trade watchdog

America's trade watchdog is seeking $3.95bn in damages from AT&T over allegations of dodgy marketing by its DirecTV wing.

The FTC this week dragged the US telco into a district court in Oakland, California, claiming the satellite TV biz lied to customers about subscription costs. The case will be heard and decided by Judge Haywood Gilliam. The damages sought will, if awarded, be poured into government coffers, helping balance in a tiny tiny way the administration's $3.6tr budget.

The case was filed in 2015, although only now has the trial started. DirecTV is accused [PDF] of running deceptive ad campaigns and unfair billing practices by offering people low rates for a short period of time and then ratcheting up costs once its subscribers were well into their contract periods.

The FTC alleges DirecTV advertised the low introductory prices while failing to properly explain to folks that the discount rates would only apply for a small portion of their service contract and that the bills would rise sharply (in some cases as much as 70 per cent) after the introductory period ended.

Additionally, the suit claims, DirecTV offers new customers free premium channels – such as HBO – for an introductory period but then runs an "opt out" system that automatically charges them extra for those channels unless they request the premium channel options be disabled. Should customers object to the billing practices and ask to cancel their service, DirecTV extracts a cancellation fee of $20 per month remaining on the two-year contract.

By failing to properly explain the terms of the contract and the extra fees that can be charged, the FTC alleges DirecTV ran afoul of rules against false advertising and failure to disclose pricing. In total, the complaint charges four violations of the FTC Act.

AT&T got itself mixed up in the case when, in the summer of 2015, it acquired DirecTV in a $50bn merger agreement.

Now, the telco behemoth could be forced to pay out the $3.95bn fee the FTC's attorneys estimate it made from its allegedly deceptive marketing and billing practices. ®

Similar topics

Similar topics

Similar topics

TIP US OFF

Send us news


Other stories you might like