Tag Archives: california

200 Electric Car Quick Charging Stations to Be Built in California

the future?

It’s always interesting to see what an entity does with its settlement money, whether required to or not.  The recent $25 billion federal mortgage settlement, although recommended to be used for debt relief and foreclosure fraud investigation, has been earmarked by states for a variety of purposes.  Most notably, the state of Georgia is using their slice of the pie to boost local infrastructure projects, arguing that the settlement includes no legally binding provisions for the money’s use and paving the way for other states to do the same.  Companies also pop up in the news sometimes for funneling settlement money into investment funds or, more commonly and in the interest of good press, towards charity, as is the case when Gordon Ramsay donated $66,000 USD after skipping out on a charity function. Continue reading →

AT&T Offers to Settle over Limiting Unlimited Plans, Is Ignored

The limit does not exist

Via AP:  When smartphones first came on the market, telephone companies offered “unlimited” data plans cheaply in an effort to attract users.  Back then, there were so few smartphones, and even fewer users who used more than a couple of gigabytes of data, that advertising these unlimited plans would mean a great many people would buy them without using much data at all.  As smartphones became more ubiquitous and easier-to-use, though, the number of heavy users on unlimited plans rose to the point where they outnumbered regular users, and it was no longer profitable to sustain truly unlimited use.  Then, AT&T did something incredibly boneheaded: they started capping data use for certain unlimited plans.  In a textbook “do not do this” move, AT&T throttled the service for the top 5% of users, or slowed it down until phones were rendered nearly useless for anything other than calls and texts.  This varied by area, too.  The top 5% in New York City would be using a vastly different amount of data than the top 5% in Middle-of-Nowhere, Kansas.  Many customers subsequently sued AT&T for false advertising.  Rightfully so, because I can’t imagine “unlimited” to mean anything other than “not limited at all”.  AT&T has since announced that it will be throttling data at 3GBs/month for all unlimited users, not just the top 5%, which brought up yet another problem: limited users pay $30/month for 3GB of data, the same as so-called “unlimited” plans.  All in all, AT&T’s handling of the affair has been a major clusterwhoops.

Read about one customer’s crusade after the jump:

$500,000 Awarded in California Sexual Harassment Settlement

Justice

Burt Legal, a law office out of Ventura, California, announced today that it has won a judgment on behalf of its client, Kristine Avalos, for $429,779 in a sexual harassment suit.    Ms. Avalos alleged that her former employer willingly maintained a hostile work environment, forcing her to endure inappropriate and demoralizing verbal attacks, often of a sexual nature.  When she complained, the company fired her.  The lawsuit, headed by lawyer Joshua A. Burt, sought damages for wrongful termination, discrimination, and emotional trauma caused by the abusive employment.  Today’s announcement signals a victory for the downtrodden everywhere.

Lawyer.com is proud to list Burt Legal among its premium respected lawyers, and we congratulate them on their victory.  To find out more about the firm, visit their page at lawyer.com, or visit their website here.

Goldline to Pay $4.5 Million to Victims of Gold Bullion Bait-and-Switch

Gold

ABC News reports that Goldline, a dealer of precious metals, is to pay $4.5 million to settle a case with its defrauded customers and avoid criminal prosecution.  The company was accused of a “bait-and-switch”, advertising the sale of gold bullion and instead selling its customers much less valuable “collectible” gold coins.  California consumer protection attorneys alleged predatory business practices and 19 counts of criminal fraud in the company’s practice of convincing its customers that the government could confiscate gold bullion but not gold coins.  The company would then use this misinformation to justify an enormous markup for the coins.  One customer reports that he had lost half of the $5,000 he spent purchasing the coins due to the discrepancy between Goldline’s markup and the market-set value of the gold itself.  Most customers paid a markup 55% higher than the gold’s actual value.

More interesting than the settlement is the company’s attempt to spin the news.  As part of the settlement, the City of Santa Monica agreed to drop all criminal charges against Goldline.  In a press release issued by the company, they stress this fact first and foremost, making no mention of the $4.5 million to be paid to their victims.  Instead, Goldline identifies the suit as an investigation of “dissatisfied customers” and only  mentions they “continue to set [the] standard for customer disclosures”.  Take this as a lesson to read a company’s press releases with a grain of salt, or in this case, a heaping mound.  Also, if you’re in the market for gold bullion, don’t buy it from a company that advertises on conservation radio talk shows.

California Property Owner Wins $24 Million Settlement in Development Case

Real property

The Los Angeles Business Journal reports that a Monrovia city property owner has settled a lawsuit with the state government’s Gold Line Construction Authority.  Gold Line was planning to build a maintenance yard for public transportation vehicles during an expansion of light-rail service.  This yard was to be placed on property that George Brokate of Monrovia owned.  Brokate was originally offered $5.6 million by the company, but filed suit to claim more when he realized a similar property owned by the city of Monrovia was given $57 million.  Gold Line insisted the discrepancy was due to a distinction between publicly- and privately-owned land.  Ultimately, Brokate and Gold Line reached a settlement of $24 million, nearly four times the original offer, to cede the property to the state of California.

“Holding out for more” is sometimes a good strategy when dealing with property transactions, especially when the government is involved.  Brokate had in his possession property that was described as “critical” to the expansion plans.  If you ever come to a business deal involving land or property, be sure to know not only how much it is potentially worth, but also how much money similar property has gone for in the past.  Such research definitely helped Mr. Brokate get the big bucks in this settlement.