.png)
To make matters worse, the Attorney General’s office added that the plan in question did… well, nothing. It was supposed to reduce the cost of repairs, but it excluded in-wall wiring and outdoor wiring — you know, a large portion of the service. As the Attorney General explained, all it really did was cover the technician coming to tell you that your equipment was broken.
Comcast denied doing anything wrong in a statement to Ars Technica, and said that it “strongly disagree[s]” with the Washington AG’s assertions. It maintained that the plan covered “virtually all charges over 99 percent of the time,” and that the lawsuit is based on a “flawed methodology and assumptions.”
However, the company hasn’t exactly gone to great lengths to provide evidence. The Attorney General’s Office said that Comcast has repeatedly refused to provide call recordings, and later admitted that it had deleted 90 percent of calls after it had been told to preserve them. Washington’s lawsuit is based in part on samples that supported accusations of deceptive practices.
Whoever’s telling the truth, this practice wouldn’t come out of the blue. Telecoms are notorious for including below-the-line fees that mask the true cost of service. However, it’s rare that they’re so audacious in those attempts that they charge you for services you didn’t want. If the lawsuit is successful, it could serve as a warning shot that deters other telcos.
