|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 3628 | Technology | 09/30/2004
A nationwide class action has been filed against various telecommunications leasing companies who were assignees of leases and equipment rental agreements entered into between individuals and business and the telecommunications company, NorVergence, Inc., on behalf of all persons who leased telecommunication or network computer equipment from NorVergence. The action alleges violations of various state and federal statutes including the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, and the FTC Holder Rule, and seeks cancellation of the leases, disgorgement of lease payments, and an order stating that the leases are unenforceable.
NorVergence, Inc., a reseller of Qwest’s long distance services, has filed a voluntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding in New Jersey. A spokesperson from Qwest advised the Georgia Public Service Commission that, although Qwest had not made a decision at this point on how to handle its relationship with NorVergence, the decision made by a New Jersey federal bankruptcy court does allow it to disconnect NorVergence from Qwest’s network without notice. On July 8, 2004, NorVergence’s customers were sent a letter that stated, “NorVergence is proactively responding to an involuntary bankruptcy petition filed against the company under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code last week. . . .In the event you should need to speak to a customer service representative, please call 888-735-7544.” That number when dialed, answers with a recording which states that the number “you dialed, (973) 621-6660” has been disconnected and that no further information is available. The number given in the recording, incidentally, is registered to VDC Communications, Inc., in Newark, New Jersey. A July 15, 2004, New Jersey Star-Ledger article states, “The [bankruptcy] filing will leave NorVergence’s customers, most of which are small businesses, facing service interruptions unless they change their service provider. It also means it is unlikely any of the money owed to the company’s former employees will be paid.” Now 11,000 small businesses in more than 20 states owe thousands of dollars to third-party creditors for services that they say were not delivered and for equipment that is now inoperable. NorVergence targeted small business owners with good credit records-- The company's salespeople, called screening managers, not only sold telephone and wireless service which the company bought wholesale from large carriers such as Qwest and Sprint -- they also pitched the company's "Matrix solution," a box which allocated bandwidth over a T1 line. What many customers apparently didn't know was that the service was unrelated to the box. And some customers claim the box, which they paid to lease from the company, had no function. Many customers purchased the box without knowing it could not be used by other phone providers and got locked into five-year leases with a bank, which had purchased the leases from NorVergence.
At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Technology Cases of Interest On November 17, 2004, the Court approved the proposed settlement in a class action that had been filed against the San Diego Association of Realtors, the North San Diego Association of Realtors, the Pacific Southwest Association of Realtors, Incorporated, the East San Diego County Association of Realtors, Incorporated, the Coronado Association of Realtors and Sandicor, Incorporated for charging smaller realtors higher fees to a multiple listing service (MLS) than larger firms from 1990 to the present. High Tech Manufacturer In Hot Water With Shareholders Over Allegedly False and Misleading Statements A class action has been filed against high tech manufacturer Remec Incorporated (Nasdaq: REMC) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between September 8, 2003 and September 8, 2004. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock. A new round of state antitrust lawsuits is warming up against Microsoft. A class action has been filed against Microsoft Corporation on behalf of Nevada residents who allege that the software giant used its monopoly power to overcharge them for its Windows operating system in violation of state antitrust laws. If work needs to be carried out on your land for the public good, you may have to grant the agency that is doing the working an easement, or permanent right-of-way, but you should be paid for it. The parties have reached a tentative $943,000+ settlement in an action filed against AT&T Corporation on behalf of certain persons who own or owned land in Maryland between October 1989 and January 8, 2003, through which railroads run and on which AT&T laid fiber optic cable. The action alleged that the company laid the cable without proper permission, in violation of state property laws. Claims must be postmarked by December 19, 2003, to be considered valid. If you volunteer to do put in time for a for-profit business, does it no longer qualify as work? A class action has been filed against America Online, Inc. and two related companies on behalf of Californians who served as chat room volunteers and who allege that the company failed to pay them minimum wages and overtime in violation of the California Business & Professions Code. If you were trying to call AT&T and accidentally reached Sprint, it might not have been a coincidence, according to a class action suit in New York state courts. Sprint and ASC Telecom admit to maintaining numerous toll-free numbers that differ by only one digit from the numbers of competing long-distance providers. The numbers generate so-called "fat fingers" business, which results from the competitors' customers' unknowingly using the wrong long distance provider. A caller attempting to dial long distance through AT&T's 1-800-CALL-ATT number, for example, might errantly dial a number such as 1-800-CELL-ATT. The companies then charge their accidental callers rates vastly greater than what the callers' intended providers charge. A customer initiated a suit alleging that the companies' actions constitute common-law fraud and violate New York's General Business Law prohibition on deceptive acts. Last week, the New York state Court of Appeals unanimously upheld a lower court's certification of a New York state class, though it declined to reverse the court's dismissal of a national class. |
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
