Cova v charter communications class actio

The complaint claims, вЂњThe TCPA was enacted to protect consumers from unsolicited telephone calls exactly like those alleged in this case.вЂќ

вЂњTrying to hawk unwanted services under the guise of it being an вЂimportant messageвЂ™вЂ¦вЂќ.

вЂњI donвЂ™t even use those people who called.вЂќ.

The complaint quotes online postings protesting this kind of behavior from Charter: Carlier asserts that she never gave Charter her permission to call her with an ATDS or prerecorded voice. On other calls, she heard a prerecorded message from Charter. The complaint alleges that this pause вЂњis a hallmark of an automatic telephone dialing system (вЂњATDSвЂќ). Many times, when Carlier picked up, she heard a pause before a live person spoke.

Carlier picked up the phone and informed she was not the person was looking for. The complaint says, вЂњOn each of the calls, sought to collect a debt from someone who is not Ms. The complaint lists the date, time, and source number for five calls placed to the cell phone of plaintiff Kelly Carlier, including two calls on November 22, 2019, two on December 17 of that year, one on December 30, and one on January 17, 2020. The calls were placed to a consumer cell phone number by an automatic dialing system without the consent of the cell phone owner. The complaint alleges the calls are made in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). has persisted in pursuing debts by placing phone calls to persons other than the ones who owe the debt. This class action alleges that Charter Communications, Inc.

Cova v charter communications class actio