[Sprint] 4g Class Action Lawsuit Against Sprint?

[burgertime]

Just curious for the legal eagles on here. Could there possibly be a lawsuit against Sprint for selling a phone that could be argued was sold under false pretenses? I was thinking today it's been 6 months since I purchased my Evo LTE and there is maybe one city in the US with actual 4g coverage. It would also appear that the promised 4g coverage is going to later than initially anticipated. While I love the phone, I bought it thinking there would be 4g coverage at least in major cities (even excluding my home city of Charlotte) at most 2 months from purchase.

I mean seriously, the whole phone is built on the fact that it was the first real 4g LTE phone on Sprint. Anyone else think there could be a basis for a class action?

 

[booboo12]

:stickyman:seriously! Switch carriers dude!

 

[burgertime]

:stickyman:seriously! Switch carriers dude!

It has nothing to do with switching carriers. I actually really like Sprint and in fact just put my girlfriend on my plan. It does however have to do with promising something when the phone is put out and not even coming close to a delivery within what would be a reasonable time frame. This isn't saying I personally want to start one, I'm just wondering if there would be a case for it.

 

[OverByter]

They made no contractual agreement to provide you with LTE services so I don't see any legal failing on Sprint's part. Advertising promises aren't generally regarded as being legally binding in any way. This brings up an issue that I've posted elsewhere, specifically how everyone was bitching about Sprints minimal WiMax coverage and then jumping on the LTE bandwagon when it currently has a smaller footprint than WiMax does.

 

[JMac202]

I have LTE coverage pretty much all over Wichita, Ks. There are some spots that are still 3G but I get full signal at my house with 4G and average 6-24 mbps down and 9-18 up. It's coming...just gotta be patient.

Also I've yet to have a 4G outage like Verizon seems to have weekly around here.

 

[EarlyMon]

Just curious for the legal eagles on here. Could there possibly be a lawsuit against Sprint for selling a phone that could be argued was sold under false pretenses? I was thinking today it's been 6 months since I purchased my Evo LTE and there is maybe one city in the US with actual 4g coverage. It would also appear that the promised 4g coverage is going to later than initially anticipated. While I love the phone, I bought it thinking there would be 4g coverage at least in major cities (even excluding my home city of Charlotte) at most 2 months from purchase.

I mean seriously, the whole phone is built on the fact that it was the first real 4g LTE phone on Sprint. Anyone else think there could be a basis for a class action?

There's far more than one city with coverage.

This is the top site to keep up on progress -

http://s4gru.com/

When the LTEvo was released, they said in public statements that the target was 2013, adding markets as they go.

We have a thread in the 4G subforum discussing Network Vision, lots of info there.

Androidforums.com wouldn't want to be a rallying ground for lawsuits, and I am not a lawyer, and if I were, I'm not your lawyer, but I can point out that your facts are not strong. Nothing personal, you know me, just saying.

Are they moving slow? I don't know, but I think that the recent acquisition of Sprint bodes well because Softbank management made a public statement that they were unhappy with service speeds here in the US when the deal went down.

 

[burgertime]

There's far more than one city with coverage.

This is the top site to keep up on progress -

Community Blog List - Sprint 4G Rollout Updates

When the LTEvo was released, they said in public statements that the target was 2013, adding markets as they go.

We have a thread in the 4G subforum discussing Network Vision, lots of info there.

Androidforums.com wouldn't want to be a rallying ground for lawsuits, and I am not a lawyer, and if I were, I'm not your lawyer, but I can point out that your facts are not strong. Nothing personal, you know me, just saying.

Are they moving slow? I don't know, but I think that the recent acquisition of Sprint bodes well because Softbank management made a public statement that they were unhappy with service speeds here in the US when the deal went down.

I'm all over s4gru, right now it seems the only cities with real (widespread) coverage are Wichita and Athens. Again I'm just wondering if there is any legal footing for a class action. I was certainly under the impression that Sprint would have wide coverage before 2013 which is why I purchased my phone.

Also just to point one thing out I def. am not trying to rally the troops for a lawsuit, I was just thinking yesterday about how I've seen a ton of class action lawsuits over pretty trivial stuff and wondered if one could be put against Sprint for what many probably feel by now is a bit of a bait and switch. Again I'm perfectly happy with my phone and consider myself pretty patient but even I'm a little, "come on now Sprint".

I guess from a legal perspective you would have to prove some type of damages from it which would be easy since you paid for the phone under a specific expectation and if a large enough party were to join that would possibly prove the expectation.

I think it was my move to big tobacco...it has me in contact with lawyers for any little marketing thing you do...so it just had me wondering was all.

 

[booboo12]

It has nothing to do with switching carriers. I actually really like Sprint and in fact just put my girlfriend on my plan. It does however have to do with promising something when the phone is put out and not even coming close to a delivery within what would be a reasonable time frame. This isn't saying I personally want to start one, I'm just wondering if there would be a case for it.

Why don't you take the first step and seek legal council. This is a forum about cell phones, carriers and android. Not a legal council forum!

In-case you are unaware: legal council =The rendition of advice and guidance concerning a legal matter
Lead the charge dude! :ridinghorse::ridinghorse:

 

[DonB]

OK boo boo you got your point across, lets all be cordial

EM great advice and well said

I agree when ever there is change it takes time, they planned on doing things earlier but sometimes it just does not always work out like that, and as EM mentioned, I am sure that the process has slowed down now by the acquisition, there must be lots of red tape, but one they are all ironed out I am sure it will all be for the better. Sprint was in big time debt and that does not get fixed over night.

 

[EarlyMon]

I'm all over s4gru, right now it seems the only cities with real (widespread) coverage are Wichita and Athens. Again I'm just wondering if there is any legal footing for a class action. I was certainly under the impression that Sprint would have wide coverage before 2013 which is why I purchased my phone.

Also just to point one thing out I def. am not trying to rally the troops for a lawsuit, I was just thinking yesterday about how I've seen a ton of class action lawsuits over pretty trivial stuff and wondered if one could be put against Sprint for what many probably feel by now is a bit of a bait and switch. Again I'm perfectly happy with my phone and consider myself pretty patient but even I'm a little, "come on now Sprint".

I guess from a legal perspective you would have to prove some type of damages from it which would be easy since you paid for the phone under a specific expectation and if a large enough party were to join that would possibly prove the expectation.

I think it was my move to big tobacco...it has me in contact with lawyers for any little marketing thing you do...so it just had me wondering was all.

Yeah, I see where you're coming from now.

There was a lot of summer fanfare about the rollout schedule, and even with the maps, it's hard to keep score. With over 30,000 towers their daily conversion rate needs to double in my opinion.

PS - I think that you meant any marketing thing they do lol.

 

[sikclown]

No I don't think there is a legal foot to stand on there. It is pretty well covered in their legal terminology that coverage is not available everywhere, some coverage will be available in 2012, more in 2013, so on and so forth. Anytime they do start talking about their coverage there is always an Asterix attached with a legal notice.

 

[AndroidSPCS]

I don't know how Sprint gets away with not having wimax or LTE in the 6th largest city in the USA - Phoenix, AZ. Still not on road map...sigh.

 

[EarlyMon]

I've always had bad reception in Phoenix. I don't know about you but I think that whole area needs a lot of attention.

 

[DonB]

I am told LA and New York is just as bad.

I've always had bad reception in Phoenix. I don't know about you but I think that whole area needs a lot of attention.

 

[EarlyMon]

I've personally done ok in LA.

 

[DonB]

I am told in the Santa Monica area and around the beaches and also in the downtown area, I have not checked and have not personally had an issue there, but I do have Friends that call me from those areas and they drop the calls all the time and sometimes sound really bad.

I've personally done ok in LA.

 

[NYCHitman1]

I am told LA and New York is just as bad.

Never had one issue in NY for 7 years of service besides when I get home and the phone tries to connect to the airave, which if you have one, you know that it automatically disconnects your call.

 

[burgertime]

Yeah, I see where you're coming from now.

There was a lot of summer fanfare about the rollout schedule, and even with the maps, it's hard to keep score. With over 30,000 towers their daily conversion rate needs to double in my opinion.

PS - I think that you meant any marketing thing they do lol.

lol well it certainly feels like anything I do. If we dot an i it has to go by a lawyer for approval. I was amazed at how strict big tobacco is (for good reason) when it comes to marketing.

 

[burgertime]

Why don't you take the first step and seek legal council. This is a forum about cell phones, carriers and android. Not a legal council forum!

In-case you are unaware: legal council =The rendition of advice and guidance concerning a legal matter
Lead the charge dude! :ridinghorse::ridinghorse:

lulz seriously? It's a Android forum and it's in a sub forum specifically regarding carriers. Not to mention it deals specifically with an Android forum. I don't think it's too much to simply get opinions about something I had a question on. I'm sure there are a few lawyers on this forum who might want to give their thoughts.

Either way I said up above that I have no intention of suing or bringing a suit...just was curious if it's something that could get Sprint in trouble which could possibly effect all of us on Sprint.

 

[DonB]

NY is a pretty big state, LOL I know there is barely any coverage in Stone Ridge, when the wife goes to visit her parents, I can never reach her

Never had one issue in NY for 7 years of service besides when I get home and the phone tries to connect to the airave, which if you have one, you know that it automatically disconnects your call.

 

[Rxpert83]

I could see someone trying something like a class action for wimax. Many were promised by sales people they'd get it and it never materialized. However, like others have mentioned there was no contractual agreement that you would get it.

Wimax isn't going down for a few years yet, so if you had wimax and bought the lte, then that was probably the wrong decision.

You had to know going into the evo 4g lte that when it was sold there was no lte.These things don't happen overnight. Its takes more than flipping a switch to get a nationwide network rolled out.

 

[NYCHitman1]

NY is a pretty big state, LOL I know there is barely any coverage in Stone Ridge, when the wife goes to visit her parents, I can never reach her

Ermagerddddd, I goes errrrvwur in NY lol.

 

[falconey]

Here is why the answer is no, but if you want to start a class action I'm sure if a lawyer(s) sees money in it they will take it up. Chances are that the actual 'victims' won't see much with a win though.

Here is Sprint's way out of paying damages regarding coverage. Straight from a Sprint email.

The Nationwide Sprint Network reaches over 285 million people. Sprint 4G LTE network is expected in midyear 2012 in limited markets, on select devices. Unless otherwise noted, Sprint 4G LTE devices will not operate on the Sprint 4G (WiMAX) network. The Sprint 3G network (including roaming) reaches over 285 million people. Not all services available on 4G, and coverage may default to 3G/separate network where 4G is unavailable. Coverage not available everywhere. Offers not available in all markets/retail locations or for all phones/networks. Pricing, offer terms, fees & features may vary for existing customers. Other restrictions apply.

 

[ironbrewer]

I have to say that I am very disapointed in the speed of the rollout of LTE. They haven't finished one area yet. The greater Denver area, with a population of 2.6 million isn't even on the schedual yet. Yeah I know it supposedly has wimax, but between my daughter and wife (both with wimax phones) have maybe seen it 1 or 2 times. I still wouldn't sue even if I thought I could win, but Sprint has got to get on the ball or they will loose customers in droves in the years to come.

 

[alsoran]

used the 4g wi-max in vegas,flagstaff,an area in albuquerque,and van nuys, 4g is great and fast loved it when working,but when it lags,it really lags and 3g is faster. upgraded to lte knowing that sprint has little coverage,but the note2 is such a great product,i'll suffer through til markets expand and hopefully see lte coverage before my untimely demise. maybe,probably not.