Was blatantly lied to by Authorized AT&T rep in Target in Nashville, TN

[MattE75]

Jurisdiction

Tennessee

Long story short was in a Super Target at Nashville and was approached by an AT&T rep and after discussing switching over from T-Mobile were told they had a great trade-in offer if we switched over. He asked for our devices and told us that we qualified for an $800 trade in credit and a free Galaxy S23 upgrade if we switched and traded in the phones. This was for 3 lines. He asked what the phones were and looked them up on his iPad and told us those 3 phones qualified for the $800 trade in and we wouldn't owe anything on the Samsung Galaxy S23 phones. The other 2 I was told we would need to pay $2 a month for A14 phones on the trade ins.

Went to the AT&T trade in site and apparently 2 of the phones have a $35 trade in value and the other 1 has a $150 trade in value and I will be responsible for paying the balance of the Galaxy S23s.

Would like to bring legal action against AT&T, Smart Circle who I believe is the authorized retailers and the employee who knowingly lied to us. I assume this would be ripe for class action as I cannot be the only person they are doing this to.

 

[Zigner]

Did you sign up with AT&T?

 

[adjusterjack]

Would like to bring legal action against AT&T, Smart Circle who I believe is the authorized retailers and the employee who knowingly lied to us.

The contract you signed spelled out all the details. If you signed without reading and understanding what your were signing then you have nothing to sue for.

Class action lawsuit is often a fantasy that people have when they don't want to pay attorneys to act on their own behalf. The chances of one happening are slim.

 

[MattE75]

The contract you signed spelled out all the details. If you signed without reading and understanding what your were signing then you have nothing to sue for.

Class action lawsuit is often a fantasy that people have when they don't want to pay attorneys to act on their own behalf. The chances of one happening are slim.

That doesn't match up from what I am reading on Google from other law sites.

"Knowingly making false statements -- whether in writing, verbally, through a simple gesture, or even silence -- constitutes false misrepresentation if it has a material effect on the deal.

Contract fraud exists when one of the parties involved in the contractual agreement presents information to the other party that is misleading, false, or in any way deceitful.

The injured party may sue for either fraud in the inducement or fraud in the factum."

 

[MattE75]

Did you sign up with AT&T?

Yes, but have not sent the phones back yet for the trade in offer and if they are unwilling to straighten this out I am cancelling it and returning the phones to them.

 

[Zigner]

Your contract clearly states that the contract is controlling regardless of any verbal assurances (or something to that effect).

 

[MattE75]

Your contract clearly states that the contract is controlling regardless of any verbal assurances (or something to that effect).

Yes that is true but fraud and/or misrepresentation would not be covered under that would it?

I also don't believe it's a contract per se as I have the ability to cancel at anytime without penalty. I guess more of a written agreement?

 

[Tax Counsel]

Would like to bring legal action against AT&T, Smart Circle who I believe is the authorized retailers and the employee who knowingly lied to us. I assume this would be ripe for class action as I cannot be the only person they are doing this to.

Your basic problem with that idea is that there is a written contract which you signed. You should have read it and understood before putting that pen to the signature line. The sales pitch in this kind of situation will be hard to prove as it will be simply your version of the conversation against hers, and in situation the written contract is going to prevail. The other problem is that sessions court (which is what Tennessee small claims courts are called) doesn't have the final say. The losing party will have ten days to appeal to circuit court. The circuit court hears a fresh trial of the case and does not give any weight to the sessions court outcome. That is known as a trial de novo. AT&T almost certainly has lawyers either in house or on retainer, which means the lawsuit won't cost them any extra legal fees. And if your contract specifies that disputes will be done by arbitration you'll likely never see court for this.

A class action lawsuit is one way to give consumer more leverage with big companies. But unless have something to this was a common or routine sales pitch you won't have enough to the class action.

Discuss with an attorney what the likely outcome will be and what this could cost you. Try to be ojective and clear with your description of events. A lot of anger and obvious dislike of the defendants will not help you.

You may also file a complaint with the Federal Trade Comission (FTC) and your state's consumer protection agency. That doesn't cost you much at all and those agencies have the resources to find out how common a practice this was. If the government wins you may see your money back, assuming one of the agencies thinks there is a good case here.

But my gut feeling on this is that salesperson was probably being paid on commission and was desperate to make sales so she substituted her own script rather than what her employer told here to do.

You may, of course, sue the employee who made the pitch in sessions court. That will be more cost effective for you, other than informing the government agencies about it.

 

[MattE75]

Your basic problem with that idea is that there is a written contract which you signed. You should have read it and understood before putting that pen to the signature line. The sales pitch in this kind of situation will be hard to prove as it will be simply your version of the conversation against hers, and in situation the written contract is going to prevail. The other problem is that sessions court (which is what Tennessee small claims courts are called) doesn't have the final say. The losing party will have ten days to appeal to circuit court. The circuit court hears a fresh trial of the case and does not give any weight to the sessions court outcome. That is known as a trial de novo. AT&T almost certainly has lawyers either in house or on retainer, which means the lawsuit won't cost them any extra legal fees. And if your contract specifies that disputes will be done by arbitration you'll likely never see court for this.

A class action lawsuit is one way to give consumer more leverage with big companies. But unless have something to this was a common or routine sales pitch you won't have enough to the class action.

Discuss with an attorney what the likely outcome will be and what this could cost you. Try to be ojective and clear with your description of events. A lot of anger and obvious dislike of the defendants will not help you.

You may also file a complaint with the Federal Trade Comission (FTC) and your state's consumer protection agency. That doesn't cost you much at all and those agencies have the resources to find out how common a practice this was. If the government wins you may see your money back, assuming one of the agencies thinks there is a good case here.

But my gut feeling on this is that salesperson was probably being paid on commission and was desperate to make sales so she substituted her own script rather than what her employer told here to do.

You may, of course, sue the employee who made the pitch in sessions court. That will be more cost effective for you, other than informing the government agencies about it.

Considering there are hundreds if not thousands of similar claims on the official AT&T forums by consumers from all over the US at these type of authorized retailers and AT&T just settled a class action lawsuit in California for similar deceptive "bait and switch" tactics I would argue that this is a pattern of behavior by AT&T where they encourage these authorized retailers to be dishonest to get people to switch over and then not honor what they are told.

I, and I would assume a judge and /or jury, would find it hard to believe that AT&T could claim they were not aware of this issue considering their employees often respond and tell the consumers to direct message them so they can "fix the problem". I have also been in 2 corporate stores where their managers have told me they deal with these issues from AT&T authorized retailers "all the time".

And regardless what the employee told me, that doesn't somehow absolve AT&T from wrongdoing as they are speaking to me on their behalf in an "authorized capacity". AT&T has requirements to ensure those people are not making misrepresentations to consumers. That is no different from a company that uses 3rd party installers that damage someone's property. If the 3rd party installer refuses to fix the situation, the company who uses them is liable to be sued for the damage. They are the ones who chose to use them and allow them to do things on their behalf.
If AT&T doesn't want to ensure they are conducting business properly then they need to stop using them to sell their products. My guess is they would rather deal with the problems and pay for them from these situations since they would be more profitable than not using them.

A contract cannot be valid if there is fraud or misrepresentation involved, nor can they force you to arbitrate under those conditions.

 

[MattE75]

As of this morning I now also have a text message from the reseller rep that he told me the phones were 800 dollar trade in value and I should owe nothing on them per when he looked them up on AT&Ts trade in site.

 

[adjusterjack]

As of this morning I now also have a text message from the reseller rep that he told me the phones were 800 dollar trade in value and I should owe nothing on them per when he looked them up on AT&Ts trade in site.

Then turn them in to that reseller, personally. Have a friend stand by and make a video of the transaction while getting the reseller to repeat the statement (legal in your state - one party consent).

Maybe have him show you what he's looking at so you can take a photo of it.

Until you actually have been wronged and have monetary damages, all you can do is gripe about how evil the worlld is, and that doesn't get you a nickel.

 

[Redemptionman]

AT&T is struggling with slow subscriber growth and a history of bad business decisions. They are bleeding subscribers and their stock price is around 14 dollars a share. Why would you want to do business with a company on deaths door step? You usually have a 30 day cooling off period from when you purchased the phone so if you don't like the deal return the equipment. A class action suit usually results in a small amount of money spread across a large number of effected consumers.

Good luck with whatever you decide to do.

 

[Tax Counsel]

You usually have a 30 day cooling off period from when you purchased the phone so if you don't like the deal return the equipment. .

TLDR: we need to know the details of the sales arrangement the store had with AT&T and we need to know if the consumer was given any notice of the right to return the purchase for a refund. The buyer would only have only three days to return it if the seller was subject to the Act and complied with it, not 30.

Long version: There two main federal consumer rights sales laws, one that provides a three day right to return the product unless the sale but has several exceptions. If AT&T regularly conducts business at that particular store then the Act won't apply and the only right of return the consumer will have is either by contract or by a state or local ordinances. The purpose of that law is to target to door and some transactions that occur in temporary spots. With that as the target that law clearly does not apply to in store sales. The question that has not yet been addressed is what kind of relationship does that store have with AT&T. In other words, it matters whether the marketing done in this instance by AT&T is an ongoing sales agreement, e.g. a store within a store, or sales made from a temporary location. The Act would not apply to the former but it would apply the latter situation. That act will not cut off the right to return, however, if the seller did not advise the buyer of his/her right of return under federal. Short answer: more details are needed to determine if AT&T fully complied with law. Note that the time allowed to return the item if the seller did everything right is only three days.

The other major federal consumer rights law targets telemarketers and similar remote sales. Since this was an in person sale it clearly isn't covered by this law. If the telemarketer completely complied with this Act then the consumer has 30 days to return the goods. Perhaps it was this rule you had mind when referring to a 30 right of return.

Tennessee law basically mirrors the federal one and gives a three day right of return.

 

[army judge]

I never engage with anyone who accosts or approaches me inside or outside of a store.

The person approaching you is attempting to SELL you something.

Nothing is free, except the oxygen you inhale, and the sunlight you enjoy.

You entered the store to buy things, ALWAYS stay on task to accomplish the mission, was an admonishment uttered regularly to me in Ranger School.

That said, protect yourself by smiling and saying, "Sorry, I don't have time to tarry today."

Then keep on keeping on, until you've collected your items you came to purchase.

 

[Redemptionman]

I meant terms and conditions for the cellular service agreement, there should be something in the contract about a return policy. It use to be 30 days but could be as little as 14 or 15 days nowadays.

 

[zddoodah]

I note that you didn't ask a question

the employee who knowingly lied to us.

Isn't it possible (likely even) that the (likely minimum wage) employee, instead of having lied, made an honest mistake?

I assume this would be ripe for class action as I cannot be the only person they are doing this to.

Class actions don't work based on assumptions, but feel free to consult with some local law firms that handle class actions and see if any are interested in trying to find others who had similar experiences.

Your contract clearly states that the contract is controlling regardless of any verbal assurances (or something to that effect).

Yes that is true but fraud and/or misrepresentation would not be covered under that would it?

No. That's the whole point of the contractual language to which Zigner referred. If some sales person tells you X, but the contract you sign says Y, then you are bound by that contract. You're supposed to read contracts before signing them and, if the contractual language doesn't match what the salesperson has told you, you're supposed to iron it out before proceeding with the transaction. There are exceptions. Whether your situation would fall within one isn't something we can determine here.

 

[Tax Counsel]

I meant terms and conditions for the cellular service agreement, there should be something in the contract about a return policy. It use to be 30 days but could be as little as 14 or 15 days nowadays.

Yes she may have a right to return it in the contract. So the first thing I would say to any consumer in a situation where they want to be able return something if they don't like it is to carefully read the return provisions in the deal and make sure that that they understand it. And do that before the consumer signs the contract.

 

[Chidi Ruka]

This same thing happened to me.
Things that were non negotiable upon switching/things they promised.

Bill would be 77 after taxes & fees (my tmobile was 70 all included)
Any stylus would work "even the one on your Note 9" I need this because I do a lot of work from my phone.
"ATT has free wifi for duration of flight (just like Tmobile)" I travel too much to not have wifi for free during the full duration of my flight

They lied about all 3 things. Also, I never saw this contract. I figured at some point I would get it. It was in my spam. AND... I never saw it because I never signed one. They signed it for me with a scribble.

I will be suing.

 

[adjusterjack]

I will be suing.

Feel free to come back and report the results of your lawsuit.

 

[army judge]

I will be suing.

Good luck, you'll need it.

Large corporations retain THOUSANDS of TALENTED ATTORNEYS, willing, able, capable to defend any and all lawsuits.

I'm told, most of those attorneys eagerly await defending their client in any courtroom, especially if the adversarial party is a layperson.