congratulations, you’ve won your lawsuit! wait, what lawsuit?

November 6, 2006 12:11 AM

congratulations, you’ve won your lawsuit! wait, what lawsuit?

I received great news today.

Robert A. Curtis of Foley Bezek Behle & Curtis LLP (”a dynamic California-based law firm”) in Santa Barbara has reached a proposed settlement for Behar International Counsel against T-Mobile. that, I am being told on a densely-written postcard, is good news for me for I am now “entitled to receive one t-mobile hot spot day pass (a $9.99 face value).”

I am a member of the settlement class because, I am told, I lived within the state of california between july 2002 and october 27, 2006 and had a t-mobile phone capable of making international calls.

wait a moment.

Robert A. Curtis of Foley Bezek Behle & Curtis LLP in Santa Barbara has taken action in my name and on my behalf without ever asking for my approval, permission, encouragement or consent and hasn’t even had the decency to inform me he had done so until after he had reached a settlement? perhaps this is just my impression but this Robert A. Curtis of Foley Bezek Behle & Curtis LLP in Santa Barbara strikes me as a bit presumptuous.

most people ignore these bland little postcards they get in the mail. who could blame them - the majority are badly written advertisements for junk nobody wants. that however would be a mistake in this case. you see, if you don’t do anything, you are still a part to this lawsuit, you are still bound by the agreement they entered to but you get nothing. the only way to receive the grand prize of one t-mobile hot spot day pass (a $9.99 face value) is to write their settlement administrator, one rust consulting inc., po box 171, minneapolis, mn 55440. the only way not to be entered in their settlement is to write and notify them you wish to be excluded.

can you tell I'm pissed?

not only did they include me without my approval, permission, encouragement or consent, they now also force me to actively to exclude myself from something they forced upon me. oh yeah, did I mention that all I got from them was one dinky postcard I could have easily mistaken for an advertisement and discarded? seems like someone doesn’t really have much interest in hearing back…

Robert A. Curtis of Foley Bezek Behle & Curtis LLP in Santa Barbara has graciously activated a telephone hotline but the operators there aren’t much help. opting out of their settlement by calling 1-800-616-1483 is not possible and a fax number where I could send my comments does not exist. writing a letter is the only possible way out, I am being told. I don’t understand the problem, the phone operator insisted, this only takes a few minutes. this lady would make one hell of a lobbyist for a nigerian spam operation.

Robert A. Curtis of Foley Bezek Behle & Curtis LLP in Santa Barbara has also activated a website that parties to the settlement are encouraged to access at internationalroamingsettlement.com but only a fool would think they could opt out out of this shady operation right then and there. it does however shed a bit of light on what is going on here:

43. How much will the attorneys for the class be paid?
Class Counsel will apply to the Court and the Arbitrator for an award of fees and expenses of $550,000. T-Mobile does not oppose this request.

44. Will the Class Representative be paid?
Class counsel will apply to the Court and the Arbitrator to approve a payment of $5,000 for Behar for its services in bringing the class action and carrying out its duties as class representative. It is up to the Court to award any such payment. T-Mobile does not oppose this request.

http://www.internationalroamingsettlement.com/faq.htm

so here is -finally but law wouldn't be law if it was any simpler- the question: I feel like being a prick. they want to make a buck in my name and I feel like throwing a couple sticks between their legs. so, hivemind-IANAL-crowd, any naughty ideas for letters I could write? should I get a lawyer myself? or should I just sit still, post more endless ramblings to metafilter and continue hating the world?

posted by krautland to law & government (14 comments total)

IANAL, but...

You're overreacting a bit. This is completely normal for a class action, the opt-out is to opt out of the settlement to maintain your legal right to sue for the same grievance as this suit has been settled for. And the action hasn't been taken in your name, someone in your position was angry about something and decided that it could pertain to an entire class.

Read up over here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_action
posted by awesomebrad at 12:17 AM on November 6, 2006

can you tell I'm pissed?

I think it was the incoherent ranting that gave you away.

What do you really want here?

Do you want a larger slice of the pie from the settlement? No, obviously, as you had never heard of the lawsuit prior to this so apparently you did not feel wronged by the defendant. And if you did, then all you have to do is remove yourself from the class settlement and file your own individual lawsuit. (Good luck getting anything.)

Do you want to prevent someone else from getting money? That ship has already sailed. There's nothing you can do about it.

Do you want to remove your standing as a member of the class? Well they've already told you how to do that, so I don't see what's stopping you.

Really this just seems like an excuse to bitch, not a real problem.
posted by Rhomboid at 12:48 AM on November 6, 2006

i think krautland probably understands the notion of a class action lawsuit. if i'm reading him right, he thinks that the class action lawsuit is being used by someone for a not so noble cause.

it is probable that if he doesn't opt out, (which seems pretty hard to do) his information will be entered into a contest to win something stupid AND this information will be sold to a myriad of data mining companies for tons of money and he will be targeted for junk mail and phone calls and emails in the future.

i'd be just as mad. i appreciate his investigation of the matter.
posted by localhuman at 12:51 AM on November 6, 2006

As others above have said, this is standard operating procedure for class actions. It seems like you have a beef with how the rules allowing them work, not like you have a problem with this particular attorney. Specifically, you have a beef with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, which you can read about either here (the site is down now, but you can also view the cached version) or from the official pdf here.

Why are the rules this way? Well, lawsuits are expensive. No one is going to sue for the $1.50 that was incorrectly charged to their account, or the $10 t-mobile pass that didn't work like it was supposed to. The costs of filing, after all, are already around $40 for small claims court.

So, to avoid giving big companies the ability to make millions by screwing millions out of tiny amounts of money, the law has allowed for class actions, where one can sue on behalf of all. The reason it's opt-out, rather than opt-in, is to make the class action a cost effective way of doing things. One big trial, that takes care of the issue, and gives everyone their $1.50 back. Asking every single person to opt-in means in practice that hardly anyone would, and you'd have the same problem as before.

At least that's the theory. I'm not going to tell you that in practice it has never been abused, or that attorneys have never brought bullshit suits that didn't do anything for the class, but lined their pockets nicely. But that doesn't seem to be the case here. You're going to get a free day's wireless, and for not doing anything. That doesn't seem like such a bad deal.

Bottom line, don't hate the players. If you must hate anything, hate the game.
posted by kingjoeshmoe at 1:20 AM on November 6, 2006

it is probable that if he doesn't opt out, (which seems pretty hard to do) his information will be entered into a contest to win something stupid AND this information will be sold to a myriad of data mining companies for tons of money and he will be targeted for junk mail and phone calls and emails in the future.

Actually, that's not probable at all.

It is clear what krautland wants. It is "being a prick." The best way to do this is to enter an appearance before the court and the arbitrator, and then object to the attorneys' fees, under FRCP 23(h)(2). This requires that you not exclude yourself from the class.

It'll be expensive and time-consuming, and you'll probably lose. Dude, it's so not worth it.
posted by grouse at 1:37 AM on November 6, 2006

One big trial, that takes care of the issue, and gives everyone their $1.50 back.

Except none of the wronged get $1.50. What they get is some service or merchandise that the defendant company and the plaintiff lawyers (who are getting a whole lot of $1.50s) have agreed is worth $1.50. In my experience, the service or merchandise is more trouble than it's worth. Verizon just settled such a suit, where I can get $10 off a new cellphone that I don't want. If I did get the phone, it would extend my contract with Verizon, which I also don't want.

Can I hate some of the players if they wrote the rules for the game?
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:13 AM on November 6, 2006

I take issue with the characterization of krautland's post being incoherent or a rant. I understood it and found it satirically and intentionally long, well written and full of pique and the aggravation which clearly motivated him.

I have the same desire to force feed the damn AARP, AAA, and local automobile dealer "printed fake check clearly visible through the envelop window" junk mail I receive daily to the idiots who send it. (I don't need advice on dealing with junk mail... already did it.)

I do think that given enough time, one might conceive of SOMETHING that optimizes the reverse-aggravation factor, at least symbolicly. (Note I said 'optimizes'.... the search for something that aggravates substantially for a minimum cost to the reverse aggravator.... like the mailing of a brick back to junkmailers.) Unfortunately, nothing's coming to mind at the moment.

But I am good and aggravated on krautland's behalf, FWIW.
posted by FauxScot at 4:16 AM on November 6, 2006

Netflix class action settlement objection.

About class action objections in general.
posted by footnote at 5:04 AM on November 6, 2006

I agree with (most of) the above posters: you're pissed for no reason. The theory of a class action of this type is that lots of people got harmed, but each only to a small extent, so it's impracticable for each to sue. So instead one person sues.

The settlement is typically fairly small because the harm was fairly small to begin with, and because settlements often do not strictly remedy the harm that was the basis for the lawsuit: the plaintiffs get certainty that they'll receive something without spending the money necessary to go to trial and go through appeals; the defendant gets the same savings. The court has to hold a fairness hearing to determine if the settlement is fair or not -- that's how the proposed Netflix class action settlement got killed. So if you think this class action settlement is unfair, you can show up in court and oppose the settlement. Or if it's really unfair, some consumer group can do it for you.

The attorneys get lots of money because they've done lots of work. They've certainly done more than you, haven't they? And when you divide the fees up over the number of plaintiffs in the class, it's a tiny amount per person. The class representative (who is a member of the class like you, and is the lead plaintiff whose name is on the suit and such) gets a little more because they had to go through more: they were deposed, their records discoverable, and so on.

In short, everything you're pissed about is standard operating procedure, and more importantly, there is a good reason for all of it. Can the system be abused? Sure. Is it in this case? Well, I'm not convinced.... The lawsuit was filed because T-Mobile charged certain customers for "calls to cell phones that were sent to voice mail while those phones were roaming internationally." Did you get charged anything for this? No? Then you're getting something for free. A dollar or two? Then I would say you're getting adequately compensated. Thousands of dollars? Then opt out of the settlement and sue already.

(I am a lawyer, but I am probably not licensed in your jurisdiction, and I do not represent you. This is not legal advice. Consult competent counsel. No, I don't practice class action litigation.)
posted by raf at 6:28 AM on November 6, 2006

Dude's got to make a living. You aren't getting hurt. Get over it.
posted by ND¢ at 7:30 AM on November 6, 2006

can you tell I'm pissed?

not only did they include me without my approval, permission, encouragement or consent, they now also force me to actively to exclude myself from something they forced upon me.

Get over yourself.

Nobody's forced anything on you. If you don't give a rat's ass, throw it away and do nothing. You know what'll happen then? Nothing, which is exactly what would have happened in your life if none of this had ever happened.

The only end result that impacts you is that there's no such thing as a free lunch and T-Mobile's rates may go up some fraction as a result of this payout, which may impact you directly or indirectly if it pushes up rates in general, though the minimal amount of competition remaining in the cell business makes that unlikely. They also dumped a bunch of money into the USPS to send out those pre-sorted postcards, which helped shore up your access to low-cost first class mail. So odds are it's a wash.

If you have issue with the larger class action lawsuit system in general, then that's fine - look into what you can do to motivate reform. But consider what you're really annoyed by and if the solution would be worse. Kingjoe gives a good and brief explanation of the why and why it's necessary and/or important.
posted by phearlez at 7:37 AM on November 6, 2006

Meta.
posted by footnote at 8:02 AM on November 6, 2006

I'm glad you, uh, "asked" this "question." A lot of people don't know how class action suits work, and you've illustrated one way to react to them, allowing others to illustrate the more reasonable way. Great job everyone! Even Meatbomb.
posted by I Am Not a Lobster at 8:24 AM on November 6, 2006

Consumer class action suits are a mixed bag. It's hard to image reforms that aren't worse than the current situation. But the status quo is not so rosy. An article from the San Francisco Weekly on this issue. The best that can be said is that the lawsuits deter unlawful practices by corporations, and provide some measure of compensation to victims.

PS The notice that you received should describe the attorney fee award -- most courts require that consumer class action notices include that information.
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 8:47 AM on November 6, 2006