Cell Phone Early Termination Fees

Lawyers are investigating unfairly charged early termination fees on cell phones. Consumers have complained that some cell phone companies have charged early termination fees when service was cancelled within 30 days from the start date; consumers have also reported that early termination cell phone fees were charged despite several complaints to their carrier about inadequate service and dropped calls.

[ESPAÑOL]

En Español [TELÃ©FONO CELULAR]

FREE CASE EVALUATION

Send your claim to a Lawyer who will review your case at NO COST or obligation.

Information on Cell Phone Termination Fees

Lawyers are investigating Early Termination Fees which were unfairly charged in either of the following two circumstances:

Where service was cancelled within 30 days from when it was started.
Where early termination fees were charged despite several complaints to your carrier about inadequate service and dropped calls.

If you (1) either complained about the quality of wireless service but got no satisfaction, or cancelled the service within 30 days from its start, (2) were charged an early termination fee, whether or not you actually paid it, and (3) are ready to do something about it, please fill out the form below.

Wireless telephone carriers have charged early termination penalties despite their failure to supply adequate telephone service. The practice of charging these unfair fees to customers who terminate their unsatisfactory wireless phone service is designed to lock customers into staying with companies that cannot provide satisfactory service.

Cell Phone Early Termination Fees Legal Help

If you (1) were unfairly charged an early termination fee, (2) actually paid the fee, (3) complained about the quality of service but got no satisfaction, and (4) are ready to do something about it, please click the link below to submit your complaint to a lawyer. California residents are especially invited to respond.

Please click here for a free evaluation of your case

Last updated on May-10-11

ARTICLES AND INTERVIEWS

Attorney Discusses Limits on Class Actions

Washington, DC: The recent Supreme Court ruling (Apr. 27, 2011)—where companies and/or employers can now require consumers to arbitrate disputes individually rather than joining forces in a consumer fraud class action, for instance, could have far-reaching implications for everyone. What does this decision mean to the typical consumer? Attorney George L. Garrow, Jr. of The Garrow Law Firm in Washington, DC, weighs in…

< [READ MORE]

Arbitration Trumps Class Action?

Washington, DC: The US Supreme Court's ruling on AT&T vs. Concepcion this past Wednesday, April 27—that companies can require its customers or employees to arbitrate disputes individually rather than joining forces in a class action—has created ire from attorneys and a number of organizations, including consumer and civil rights advocates.

V [READ MORE]

Senator Klobuchar Equates Cell Phone Fees to a "Rigged Carnival Game"

St.Paul, MN: With the release of a recent FCC report that highlights the concerns Americans have over cell phone fees, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar has launched a new campaign to reform the billing practices of the telecom industry [READ MORE]