Cell Phone Companies in Legal Battles Over Contracts Essay

707 Words 3 Pages
Cell Phone Contracts In the present day, most people have cell phones. It is also true that most people have a negative experience with a cell phone company imposing early termination fees. When people activate their cell service, they are forces to enter a binding contract for one to two years. If the customer agrees to the contract they will be obligated to pay the whole contract term or they will be assessed the early termination fee. However, the days of cell phone contracts early termination fees are beginning to change.
Contract
“A contract is a legally enforceable promise.” Lau, T., & Johnson, L. (2013). When people buy cell phones these days, they understand that they will be entering a legally enforceable promise.
…show more content…
Cell Phone Contracts In the present day, most people have cell phones. It is also true that most people have a negative experience with a cell phone company imposing early termination fees. When people activate their cell service, they are forces to enter a binding contract for one to two years. If the customer agrees to the contract they will be obligated to pay the whole contract term or they will be assessed the early termination fee. However, the days of cell phone contracts early termination fees are beginning to change.
Contract
“A contract is a legally enforceable promise.” Lau, T., & Johnson, L. (2013). When people buy cell phones these days, they understand that they will be entering a legally enforceable promise. Nevertheless, the customer expects that the service that the company provides is adequate and up to the customers standards service in return. This is the reason some of the cell companies have been in legal battles over their cell contracts.
T-Mobile Class Action Suit A few years past, T-Mobile held customers to a flat rate fee of 200 dollars whether or not the customer was in the beginning of the contract or nearing the end. The company tried to settle this disagreement with customers in arbitration. However, a California court found that the agreement was unconscionable and unenforceable. “The lawsuit also argues that the flat fee for early termination constituted "an unlawful penalty under Civil Code section 1671, subdivision (d), is unlawful
Open Document