Consumer Protection

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, alongside the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S. DOJ), and a bipartisan coalition of 30 attorneys general, filed a lawsuit against Live Nation, the parent company of Ticketmaster, alleging unlawful conduct that has hampered competition in the ticketing and promotions of live music concerts. Live Nation’s strong domination over ticketing and promotions markets has allowed it to engage in a wide variety of anticompetitive behaviors.

“As the fifth largest economy in the world, California knows that vigorous competition is essential to a well-functioning economy,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Live Nation imposed its dominance of the live concert industry by manipulating the marketplace — sending ripples of economic injustice throughout our state. While this illegal conduct benefits Live Nation’s bottom line — it hurts artists, their fans, and our economy. This lawsuit sends a clear message: Here in California, we’re committed to protecting consumers, holding industry accountable, enforcing antitrust laws, and ensuring a fair and competitive market.”

The lawsuit alleges Live Nation violated Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, which prohibits anticompetitive agreements, monopolization, and attempted monopolization. Monopolization offenses occur when a single firm maintains a monopoly unlawfully, by using its control of the market to exclude rivals and harm competition. In addition, the complaint alleges violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law. 

The complaint filed today alleges that Live Nation protects its monopoly by using both exclusive contracts with promoters and venues to protect its dominant position in the live music industry to force artists and venues to use both its ticketing and concert promotion services. Live Nation uses their market dominance to leverage its power over all other aspects of the live music entertainment industry: from artist management, to ticketing, and promotions. For example, Live Nation has used their dominance in promotions to force venues to use Ticketmaster’s ticketing services, thereby blocking innovation and unfairly competing with competitors in the music concert business.

In the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta, U.S. DOJ, and coalition states allege that Live Nation has:

• Harmed fans through higher fees. Fans’ ticketing experience — from buying a ticket to showtime — is also worse than it would be if the industry was competitive.

• Maintained its monopoly in ticketing markets by locking up venues through restrictive long-term, exclusive agreements and threats that venues will lose access to Live Nation-controlled tours and artists if they sign with a rival ticketer.

• Leveraged its extensive network of venues to force artists to select Live Nation as a promoter instead of its rivals, maintaining its promotions monopoly.  

The lawsuit asks the court to restore competition in the live entertainment industry by:

• Prohibiting Live Nation from engaging in its anticompetitive practices.
• Ordering Live Nation to divest Ticketmaster.
• Securing financial compensation for California, as well as for fans who were overcharged by Live Nation, leading them to pay more than they would have in a competitive market for tickets.

In filing the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta joins the U.S. Department of Justice and the attorneys general of Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia. 

Attorney General Bonta is committed to enforcing anticompetitive laws to ensure fair prices, innovation, and consumer choice.

In March, Attorney General Bonta, alongside U.S. DOJ, and a coalition attorneys general, filed a lawsuit challenging Apple’s anticompetitive behavior related to iPhone smartphones. The lawsuit alleges Apple deliberately made it more difficult for third-party apps and products to operate with the iPhone, resulting in higher prices for consumers and harm to competition in the smartphone industry. In February, Attorney General Bonta, the Federal Trade Commission, and a bipartisan coalition of states, announced filing a lawsuit that challenges the proposed merger of Kroger and Albertsons; this merger presents a significant risk of reduced competition and higher food prices nationwide. In December 2023, Attorney General Bonta announced a $700 million multistate settlement with Google resolving allegations that the company violated state and federal laws by monopolizing the Android smartphone application market. In November 2023, Attorney General Bonta and three other attorneys general announced joining U.S. DOJ’s lawsuit against Agri Stats, Inc., a company that organizes and manages anticompetitive information exchanges for meat processors and facilitated the unlawful increase of chicken, pork, and turkey prices across the U.S.

A copy of the complaint is available here.

SACRAMENTO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued the following statement after Assembly Bill 1949 (AB 1949), the California Children’s Data Privacy Act, passed the Assembly. AB 1949, sponsored by Attorney General Bonta and authored by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), would provide more robust protections for kids’ data privacy. This marks an important continuation of Attorney General Bonta’s commitment to improving child safety online. 

"AB 1949 closes a gap in California’s privacy laws that currently allows giant social media companies to exploit our children’s data,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This puts our kids at risk, leaving them vulnerable to having their location and other personal data tracked, shared, and sold online. We must act swiftly to create a safer online space for children to learn, explore, and play.”

AB 1949 strengthens privacy protections for children under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). CCPA secures increased privacy rights for California consumers, including the right to know what personal information businesses collect and sell, and the right to stop those sales to third parties. As it stands, CCPA does not effectively protect 17-year-olds, or limit businesses from collecting or exploiting the data of young users, so long as they do not sell it. This gap has allowed companies like Google and Meta to collect, exploit, and monetize young users’ data on a massive scale. Despite businesses’ awareness that children use their services, businesses currently design their online services to include features that may be harmful to children, including manipulative techniques to prod them to spend hours on end online or provide personal information beyond what is expected or necessary. 

Accordingly, AB 1949 establishes stronger data privacy protections for children under the CCPA to help keep children under age 18 and their data from being collected and exploited without parental consent. The bill seeks to prohibit businesses from collecting, using, sharing, or selling personal data of anyone under the age of 18, unless they receive informed consent. For users under 13, this informed consent must come from a parent.

The CARS Rule would protect consumers during the sale, financing, and leasing of new vehicles

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today led a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in National Automobile Dealers Association et al. v. FTC, supporting the Federal Trade Commission’s defense of its new auto sales (CARS) Rule. The rule addresses several persistent unfair and deceptive practices in the auto sales industry. In the amicus brief, filed in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the coalition argues the new FTC rule is a necessary step to protect consumers as existing law has proven insufficient to stamp out widespread dealer misconduct. In 2022, Attorney General Bonta expressed his support for the FTC’s rulemaking, which would establish new protections for car buyers nationwide, and will be instrumental in assisting ongoing state efforts to eliminate unfair and deceptive practices that victimize consumers and disadvantage honest businesses.

“For many consumers, a vehicle is a necessity and can be the most expensive one-time purchase they ever make. That car or truck can be a lifeline that takes them to school, a job, or back home to their families,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Unfortunately, car dealers too often fail to honor advertised prices, tack on unnecessary add-on products, or engage in other deceptive practices. As attorneys general, we know these practices harm low-income consumers and we need more tools in the toolbox to address persistent unfair and deceptive practices in the auto sales industry.” 

The CARS Rule addresses deceptive tactics in widespread use by car dealers. First, the rule prohibits bait-and-switch tactics, in which dealerships lure customers based on deceptive promises, only to reveal the truth late in the transaction after consumers have already invested substantial time and effort in the process and are likely to feel worn down or pressured to finalize the deal. The CARS Rule also restricts deceptive practices relating to hidden or misrepresented charges, particularly for vehicle add-ons; dealerships often sell these products to consumers through deceptive means, including concealing the added costs or misrepresenting them as mandatory.  

The legal challenge brought by the National Automobile Dealers Association argues existing law is sufficient to protect consumers, and there is no rational basis for FTC's CARS Rule. In the amicus brief, the states refute this erroneous argument, arguing that the FTC's CARS Rule is necessary to protect consumers from misconduct that remains widespread and pernicious, in spite of existing regulation.   

As states’ top law enforcers, the attorneys general know unfair and deceptive business practices in the automotive sales industry are a pervasive problem and are first-hand witnesses to ongoing violations of existing law. States have a long history of protecting consumers in the automotive sales industry through investigations, settlements, and enforcement and have found existing law has proven inadequate to address persistent unfair and deceptive practices in the automotive sales industry.

In 2022, Attorney General Bonta announced a $27.5 million settlement with the now-defunct Paul Blanco’s Good Car Company resolving allegations that the company engaged in unlawful business practices, including false advertising about credit and discount programs, making false statements on credit applications, and deceiving customers into purchasing add-on products. Through a judgment entered with the court, the company admitted to and agreed to be held liable for publishing 650,000 false advertisements, defrauding auto lenders by misrepresenting vehicle values on 20,000 occasions, and deceiving consumers regarding add-on products. Mr. Blanco also accepted a ten-year ban on participation in the California auto industry. Prior to the Attorney General’s lawsuit, Paul Blanco’s Good Car Company was one of the largest independent used car dealership networks in California, operating seven dealership locations in the state. Paul Blanco’s deceptive radio and television advertisements targeted vulnerable, predominantly low-income consumers with subprime credit,  promising easy approval for unrealistically low interest rates to lure unsuspecting consumers to their dealerships. Other states including Maryland, Arizona, and Illinois have sought to curtail similar bait-and-switch schemes.

In addition to states’ enforcement experiences, consumers themselves have made voluminous reports of their experiences falling victim to deceptive practices when purchasing cars. Further, complaints to the Better Business Bureau about new and used auto dealerships numbered in the tens of thousands annually, and from 2020 to 2021 were the second highest of any industry.

In the brief, the coalition argues that the CARS Rule is tailored to address the noncompliance state attorneys general see in their enforcement role, and that FTC's move to add specificity to industry regulations is a reasonable—and important—way to reverse the trend of noncompliance that remains in spite of the existing, pre-CARS Rule regulations. The CARS Rule does so by taking important steps to address these problems by prohibiting dealers from making misrepresentations and charging for add-ons that provide no consumer benefits, and by strengthening disclosure and record-keeping requirements. The coalition asserts that CARS Rule is an important supplement to existing authorities and would provide the states with much-needed ammunition in their ongoing efforts to detect and remediate unfair and deceptive practices in automotive sales.

In sending today's letter, Attorney General Bonta was joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington, and the District of Columbia.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to expanding and enforcing protections for car buyers.

• In 2023, Attorney General Bonta sent a letter to Kia America and Hyundai Motor Company expressing concerns about the companies’ failure to take adequate steps to address the alarming rate of theft of the companies’ vehicles and calling on the companies to take immediate action to correct this public safety issue. 

• In 2022, Assembly Bill 2311 was signed into law. Authored by Assemblymember Brian Maienschein and sponsored by Attorney General Bonta, AB 2311 addresses the sale and administration of guaranteed asset protection waivers, a costly add-on product of little value to consumers that is often sold by car dealers along with auto loans and is generally targeted at consumers with lower incomes and subprime credit.

A copy of the amicus brief can be found here. 

SACRAMENTO — California Attorney General Bonta issued the following statement after Senate Bill 976 (SB 976) Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act passed the Senate. SB 976, sponsored by Attorney General Bonta and authored by Senator Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), would limit the harms associated with social media addiction. This marks an important continuation of Attorney General Bonta’s commitment to improving child safety online.

“SB 976 puts control back in the hands of parents and children. Our children and teens are experiencing a public health crisis, caused by social media companies in their thirst for profits,” said Attorney General Bonta. “In California, we take mental health seriously, we take children’s online safety seriously — and we know that we don’t have a minute to waste to protect our kids. In California, we move fast and fix things.”

SB 976, co-sponsored by Public Health Advocates and the Association of California School Administrators, takes steps to protect young users from online addiction. First, SB 976 would give parents the choice of whether users under the age of 18 would receive a chronological feed from users they already follow or the current default on addictive social media platforms, an algorithmic feed. Algorithmic feeds fuel harmful and addictive use of the platforms and heavy social media use can cause mental health harms to young users. Second, the bill would prohibit social media platforms from sending notifications between 12:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. to users under age 18, unless a parent or guardian has provided consent. Third, SB 976 expands parental controls by requiring social media platforms to provide parents the ability to establish certain protections that will be turned on by default, including the ability to halt social media notifications and to block access to platforms for minors during nighttime hours and during the school day. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced a settlement with Liberty Tax (Liberty) for running deceptive advertisements that misled consumers into thinking they were getting a free advance on their tax refund when they were actually taking out a high-cost loan. These actions violated California law and a 2009 injunction obtained by the California Department of Justice following trial, which required Liberty to clearly disclose in every refund loan advertisement that the product is a loan. Under today’s settlement, which the court will enter as an amended judgment, Liberty must pay $150,000 in civil penalties and comply with enhanced disclosure requirements about its loan products.

“Liberty tax deceived hardworking families, eager for their tax refunds, into falling for high-priced loans. This is illegal and as the People’s Attorney, I will not stand for it,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This settlement prevents Liberty Tax from lying and misleading their customers in the future and serves as a warning to other tax preparation servicers: My office is watching, and we are prepared to go to the mat for California consumers."

Liberty provides tax preparation services directly to consumers, and as part of that, sells refund anticipation loan products, which are short-term loans with applicable fees secured by a consumer’s anticipated tax refund. 

In 2007, then Attorney General Brown sued Liberty, alleging that it deceptively advertised its refund anticipation loans by failing to clearly disclose that they were costly loans and not advances on consumers’ actual tax refunds. In 2009, Liberty was ordered to pay $1,161,699 in civil penalties and $135,866 in restitution and submit strong injunctive terms barring Liberty from deceptive advertising. Specifically, Liberty was ordered to clearly and “conspicuously” disclose in every refund loan advertisement that the product is a loan, and that fees and interest may apply.

Despite this court order, Liberty again began advertising “Easy Advance” and “Holiday Advance” refund anticipation loans online and in its stores without adequately disclosing that the products are loans. Today’s settlement imposes civil penalties for those violations and strengthens Liberty’s disclosure requirements. The new injunctive terms specifically define “conspicuous” in a number of advertising contexts, require Liberty to include the word “loan” in the name of each refund anticipation loan product, and require that Liberty use the full name of the loan product whenever the product is mentioned. This is intended to prevent marketing that might mislead consumers into thinking they are getting an advance on their tax refund when they are actually applying for a loan.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to standing up for Californians’ financial protection and their right to file taxes safely.

Last March, Attorney General Bonta issued a consumer alert with tips on preparing taxes safely, and Californians to file early, take actions to protect themselves online, and learn about free or low-cost tax filing opportunities. In May 2022, Attorney General Bonta, as part of a coalition of 51 attorneys general and with the Los Angeles City Attorney and Santa Clara County Counsel, announced a $141 million settlement against Intuit, resolving allegations that the California-based company deceptively advertised its “free” online TurboTax products. In May 2023, Attorney General Bonta  announced that consumers who were tricked by TurboTax’s owner Intuit into paying for free tax services would begin receiving checks. Californians received more than $12.2 million, distributed to the more than 400,000 consumers who were eligible for a free tax filing program and were instead deceived into paying to file their federal tax return.

The proposed judgment, which remains subject to court approval, is available here. 

Borrowers should not be held responsible for student loan servicers’ misconduct or oversight failures

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today joined a multistate coalition of 19 attorneys general in sending a letter to the U.S. Department of Education (ED) supporting ED’s proposed regulations that would expand debt relief to more federal student loan borrowers. U.S. borrowers currently hold over $1.7 trillion in federal student loan debt; 3.8 million Californians owe over $142 billion of this debt.

“For many students, especially low-income students and students of color, college is only possible because of student loans. Most students have no choice but to go into significant debt to afford higher education,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Policy failures and misconduct by student loan servicers have left many borrowers in the dark, unable to navigate complicated and burdensome loan repayment and forgiveness programs. The path to relief is for many, a new barrier to jump though instead of a quick and simple step. These new regulations will expand relief to more borrowers, I urge the Department of Education to very quickly apply relief.”

In the letter, the attorneys general support the proposed federal policy, which would waive repayment for borrowers who have seen their debt balloon beyond the amounts they originally owed, borrowers who have been struggling under the burden of student loan debt for decades, and borrowers who attended schools that failed to provide sufficient value to their students. The proposed regulations also would waive remaining loan balances for borrowers who meet the eligibility criteria for loan forgiveness under existing programs but have not achieved forgiveness because they have not successfully enrolled in or applied to these programs.  

The letter continues by urging ED to implement the relief quickly to help alleviate borrowers of the financial and psychological burdens associated with long-term student loan debt. Attorneys general have long been on the front lines of the student debt crisis, fighting on behalf of student loan borrowers who have been struggling for years due to the undeniable shortcomings of the student loan system; shortcomings which are disproportionately borne by low-income borrowers and borrowers of color. One study found that, 20 years after starting college, the average Black student loan borrower still owes 95% of their original balance, while the average white borrower owes only 6%. Due to racial wealth disparities, most Black and Latino college students come from low-income backgrounds and can count on only a fraction of the financial support as their white counterparts. More debt and less support have undeniably led to long-term debt burden and severe financial consequences. According to the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, although more students of color are attending college, student debt has delayed them from purchasing homes, starting businesses, and building generational wealth. 

In sending today’s letter, Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Massachusetts, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia.

Attorney General Bonta has been active in in protecting and obtaining meaningful relief for student loan borrowers.

• In September 2023, Attorney General Bonta submitted a letter to the Biden-Harris Administration raising concerns about the resuming of federal student loan payments and asking for robust measures to protect borrowers.
• In January 2023, Attorney General Bonta, along with 21 other state attorneys general, filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the Biden Administration’s plan to discharge between $10,000 and $20,000 in federal student loan debt for certain lower-income borrowers. 
• In January 2022, Attorney General Bonta announced a multistate settlement against Navient, one of the largest student loan servicers in the country, to resolve allegations of misconduct in the servicing and collection of federal student loans. The settlement includes $95 million in nationwide restitution for federal student loan borrowers and additional private student loan debt cancellation. Attorney General Bonta called on the U.S. Department of Education to address the $1.7 trillion student loan crisis and longstanding failures in federal student loan servicing.

A copy of the letter can be found here.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today released the following statement after the Supreme Court upheld the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) funding structure as constitutional and protected its past and ongoing regulatory actions in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America (CFSA).

“Today’s decision reaffirms the absolutely critical role CFPB has in advancing consumer protection and regulating the financial services industry. The CFPB has been an invaluable enforcement partner to California, working to protect consumers from fraud, abuse, and unfair business practices —  and has returned a staggering $17.5 billion to Americans since its creation,” said Attorney General Bonta. “My office will continue to use all legal tools at our disposal to robustly enforce California’s consumer protection laws. We look forward to continued collaboration with the CFPB.”

Attorney General Bonta has been a strong ally of the CFPB at every step in the legal process.

In May 2023, Attorney General Bonta, as part of a coalition of 24 attorneys general, filed an amicus brief supporting the CFPB’s contention that the agency’s funding structure is constitutional and that the court should not invalidate the CFPB’s past and ongoing regulatory and enforcement actions even if it determines that the agency’s current funding structure is not constitutional. In October 2023, Attorney General Bonta issued a statement in response to the Supreme Court hearing oral argument in this case. 

Martin paid $256,997.65 in restitution to victims

SAN DIEGO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and San Diego District Attorney Summer Stephan this week announced that defendant Marie Martin, a San Diego-based travel agent and registered seller of travel, was sentenced to six months of home confinement and six months of felony probation for embezzling travel funds from more than 150 parents who paid for eighth-grade school trips to the East Coast. After the school trips were cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Martin refused to provide refunds to the parents, instead spending funds on personal expenses. Following her guilty plea in January, as part of the sentencing, Martin paid $256,997.65 in restitution to victims.

“Parents all over California are willing to spend their time and money to give their children a better life. Marie Martin financially took advantage of more than 150 families during an already traumatic and financially challenging time,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “I am proud to fight for the rights of consumers and thank the San Diego District Attorney’s Office for their partnership in investigating and prosecuting this case.”

“This defendant’s disgraceful crimes cheated parents who are working to give their children expanded educational opportunities that would broaden their horizons,” said San Diego County District Attorney Summer Stephan. “Together with the Attorney General, our Consumer Protection Unit delivered justice and restitution to the families who were defrauded out of their hard-earned income.” 

In early 2019, Martin solicited funds from parents at nine schools in Los Angeles and Orange counties for eighth-grade school trips to Washington, D.C., and the East Coast. The school trips were supposed to take place in 2020, but were canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. When the parents who paid for these trips requested refunds, Martin declined. Instead, she allegedly used client funds for personal expenses, including credit card purchases, rent, and artwork. The investigation revealed that even before the pandemic, Martin was experiencing cash flow problems and commingling client funds. Because Martin had used the parents’ funds for personal expenses, she was unable to refund parents when the pandemic halted all travel. 

The Attorney General’s Office operates the Seller of Travel Program, which registers travel agents and certain other travel businesses operating in California. The Attorney General, local district attorneys, and city attorneys can bring enforcement actions against sellers of travel for violations of the law. Any Californian who believes they have been wronged by a seller of travel is encouraged to contact their local district attorney and/or local law enforcement agency, and file a complaint with our office at ‪www.oag.ca.gov/report. California consumers who suffer losses due to a registered seller of travel’s failure to provide travel services or refunds may be eligible to file a restitution claim with The Travel Consumer Restitution Corporation.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced that the U.S. District Court in Arizona denied Avid Telecom’s (Avid) attempts to dismiss and delay a bipartisan, 49-state lawsuit against the company and its owner, Michael D. Lansky, for allegedly initiating and facilitating billions of unlawful robocalls in California and around the country. Those robocalls included Social Security Administration scams, Medicare scams, and employment scams; two robocall examples can be found here and here. Forty-nine attorneys general who are also members of the Anti-Robocall Multistate Litigation Task Force sued Avid in May 2023.

“Robocalls recklessly interrupt people’s busy days and cause Californians real financial damage every year,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Avid Telecom was responsible for delivering not hundreds, or thousands, or millions of robocalls — but billions of robocalls, and will now have to take responsibility. My office stands ready to defend Californians against bad actors looking to exploit consumers.”

Avid Telecom allegedly sent or attempted to transmit more than 24 billion scam calls in a four-year period about Social Security Administration scams, Medicare scams, auto warranty scams, Amazon scams, DIRECTV scams, credit card interest rate reduction scams, and employment scams. They continued transmitting these calls even after being notified at least 329 times that these illegal robocalls were being sent across their networks. 

A copy of the order is available here.

A significant resolution to a nationwide problem 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, alongside a bipartisan, multistate coalition, announced a $10.25 million settlement with major U.S wireless carriers after an industry-wide investigation of misleading advertising practices. The settlement, which is subject to court approval, resolves the allegations that the carriers violated the Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law by engaging in deceptive and misleading advertising. Today’s settlement provides strong, industry-wide injunctive relief that applies to all major wireless carriers and includes a payment of $10.25 million to the states, with $1.2 million going to California.  

“We have all heard and seen advertisements announcing too good to be true cell phone deals, offering wireless devices for free or “unlimited” data. Turns out, many of those deals are indeed too good to be true,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Wireless carriers have exploited the fact that cell phones are now essential to our day-to-day lives, especially for low-income or immigrant consumers who are more likely to depend on cell phone plans for internet access. I am proud that this settlement requires industry-wide changes to the deceptive advertising practices which have become commonplace in the marketing of cell phones. As the People’s Attorney, I am committed to enforcing consumer laws in the state of California and speaking out for consumers nationwide.”

Today’s settlement provides industry-wide injunctive relief, which addresses all of the common misleading advertising practices committed by major wireless carriers. In addition to ensuring that all advertising is truthful, accurate, and non-misleading, the wireless carriers must comply with specific requirements, including: 

• Unlimited Claims: Whenever a Wireless Carrier makes an “unlimited” data claim, they are required to clearly and conspicuously explain all material restrictions on data speed, including any thresholds at which unlimited data speeds may be slowed. Wireless carriers are prohibited from claiming that plans which set numerical caps on the quantity of data available are unlimited.  

• Switch-and-Save Offers: Whenever a Wireless Carrier makes an offer to pay a consumer’s cost to switch carriers, the Wireless Carrier must clearly and conspicuously explain all requirements a consumer must fulfill to take advantage of the offer.

• Discounted Services Claims: Whenever a Wireless Carrier makes a cost-comparison or discounted services offer, they must make comparisons between services that are similar rather than making misleading apples-to-oranges comparisons. Similarly, if a Wireless Carrier intends to provide a discount or a savings after-the-fact in the form of cash, credit, or a rebate, they must explain how the consumer will receive the funds and how long the consumer must wait to receive the funds.

• Free or Discounted Device Claims: Whenever a Wireless Carrier offers consumers a “free” device as part of a plan, they must explain everything a customer must do to obtain the “free” device, including any fees they must pay or other devices they are required to purchase. Wireless Carriers are also prohibited from increasing the price of the underlying service or other relevant devices to make up for the cost of the “free” device.

• Device Lease Claims: Whenever a Wireless Carrier offers a device on lease as opposed to for purchase, they must make that fact clear to a consumer. Wireless Carriers are prohibited from characterizing leases as purchases.

• Employee Training: The Wireless Carriers are required to train all employees responsible for advertising and all customer service representatives on the provisions of this settlement to ensure on-the-ground compliance.

• Complaint Representatives: The Wireless Carriers are required to designate a dedicated employee to work with the attorneys general to resolve complaints from everyday consumers.

Over the years, competition among wireless carriers has been growing, and advertising by the carriers has become increasingly aggressive. As more consumers use their mobile phones for internet access, especially low-income consumers whose mobile phones may be their primary form of internet access, the cost and quality of mobile phone plans is increasingly important. In 2021, 27% of people with a household income of $30,000 or less were reliant on their smartphones for online access, compared to only 6% of people with a household income of over $75,000. Cell phones and mobile plans represent one of the larger financial decisions low-income consumers make in a given year.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to investigating and remedying harm to consumers affected by unlawful and deceptive business practices. 

• Earlier this month, Attorney General Bonta, along with the District Attorneys of Alameda and Marin counties, and city and county of San Francisco, announced a $23 million settlement with Service Corporation International, the nation’s largest funeral service provider for engaging in false advertising and unlawful and deceptive acts in its marketing and sale of pre-need cremation packages.
• Also in April, Attorney General Bonta submitted a comment letter supporting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s proposed rule which would close a regulatory loophole that enables banks to extract billions of dollars from consumers by charging overdraft fees without adequately disclosing basic credit terms.
• In February, Attorney General Bonta announced a settlement with two separate local Bakersfield landlords and their property management company, for multiple violations of the Tenant Protection Act, including unlawful rent increases, unlawful evictions, and failure to return security deposits on time.
• In December, Attorney General Bonta submitted a comment letter to the FCC applauding its efforts to re-establish nationwide net neutrality rules and urging the FCC not to preempt California’s own net neutrality law. In its draft order, the FCC agreed with Attorney General Bonta and concluded that California’s law is consistent with the proposed rules and should stay on the books.

Copies of the complaints can be found here, here, and here. Copies of the proposed judgments, pending court approval, can be found, here, here, and here.