This is a Notice of a proposed Settlement in a class action lawsuit Abramson v. Alpha Gas and Electric, LLC, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 15-CV-05299-KMK (the “Action”). The settlement would resolve claims against defendant Alpha Gas and Electric, LLC (“Alpha”) arising from telemarketing calls made by it to cellular telephone numbers in alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (the “TCPA”).
Even if discovery shows that a third party agent acting on the defendant's behalf made the calls in question, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act would still provide for liability. The Supreme Court of the United States recently clarified that the Telephone Consumer Protection Act does provide for vicarious liability. See Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 136 … Continue reading Company Liability for Other Making Calls
Cunningham is a Davidson County resident who claims to have received at least twenty-eight phone calls, sometimes only one or two seconds apart, from callers purporting to be conducting a "safety survey" but in fact marketing home security systems and related services. The marketing effort turned out to be in support of a deal pursuant to which the recipient would accept the installation of a "free" home security system
To prevent evasion of the TCPA's call prohibitions, the FCC has treated calls made by a third party on behalf of a company as if the company itself made the call, whether in relation to collection or solicitation calls subject to § 227(b) or in rules governing solicitation calls addressed in § 227(c). With respect to collection calls under § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) made to wireless numbers, the FCC explained: To ensure that creditors and debt collectors call only those consumers who have consented to receive autodialed and prerecorded message calls, we conclude that the creditor should be responsible for demonstrating that the consumer provided prior express consent. The creditors are in the best position to have records kept in the usual course of business showing such consent, such as purchase agreements, sales slips, and credit applications. . . .
1. Home Security Calls A Davidson County resident who claims to have received at least twenty-eight phone calls, sometimes only one or two seconds apart, from callers purporting to be conducting a "safety survey" but in fact marketing home security systems and related services. According to the plaintiff, the marketing effort turned out to be in … Continue reading DO NOT CALL LIST AND HOME SECURITY SERVICES
The Federal Communications Commission today said that a scammer named Adrian Abramovich "apparently made 96 million spoofed robocalls during a three-month period" in order to trick people into buying vacation packages. The FCC proposed a fine of $120 million, but it will give the alleged perpetrator a chance to respond to the allegations before issuing … Continue reading DO NOT CALL AND ROBO CALLS