Connecticut Attorney General William Tong announced at a press conference today that the state is expanding its suit against Optimum, a TV and cable provider that is accused of charging over $39.1 million in junk fees since 2019. Additionally, the company allegedly used misleading advertising to hide the purpose and existence of the fee from Spanish-speaking customers.
“We’re here to announce the state of Connecticut has sued Optimum, formerly known as Altice, for ripping people off, plain and simple,” said Tong. “This is an amended complaint for conduct that is really deceptive, and I would say works a fraud upon people here in Connecticut.”
The state originally filed a suit against the company in May 2024 on three different violations of the state’s Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA); the junk fees, inadequate speed disclosures and using English-language disclosure of the junk fees on Spanish marketing materials in an effort to obfuscate explanation and mislead customers. The amended complaint announced by Tong today contained additional evidence collected by the Attorney General’s Office from aggrieved consumers it has corresponded with since the original complaint was filed.
The amended complaint contained examples of the misleading advertisements provided by the company. One advertises Optimum’s internet services as costing $64.99 “for life,” a price that did not include the company’s monthly “Network Enhancement Fees,” which originally cost an additional $2.50 a month and have since been raised to $6 a month. Another advertisement shows that in Optimum’s advertisements to Spanish-speakers, it disclosed the existence of these “Network Enhancement Fees,” as well as included information on equipment charges and service speed limitations, in English.
“The advertising is in Spanish, the disclosures are in English,” said Tong. “You’re kidding, right? So, all the good stuff they put in Spanish to get you to buy, but the stuff they’re supposed to tell you so you can make an informed decision is in a language you can’t read.”
The amended complaint also included an explanation provided by the company for the inclusion of the fee, that was mailed out to Optimum customers on their January 2019 bills.
“We continue to invest in our network and new technologies, such as delivering faster broadband speeds and Altice One, our all-in-one entertainment experience,” reads the bill. “Effective with your February bill, adjustments will be made to certain rates listed below, including the introduction of a Network Enhancement Fee of $2.50 per month, that will enable us to continue to invest in our network and infrastructure to deliver the best technology and services possible.”
Tong said that the fees are “rip offs,” because they aren’t optional, aren’t honestly disclosed to customers, and don’t provide any added benefit that shouldn’t already be accounted for in the advertised rates.
“It’s not like you pay $6 more and you get a better, more enhanced network than everybody else who does not pay the $6 fee,” said Tong. “No, everybody pays the $6 fee, and so there’s no enhancement. It’s something that everybody has to pay.”
Furthermore, the fees are still being charged to this day, despite the fact the company is being sued by the state for them.
“Despite our investigation, despite this lawsuit, despite this amended complaint, they’re still charging it, which is a gigantic [Tong motioned a middle-finger] to the people of this state,” said Tong.
The amended complaint calls the alleged CUTPA violations “oppressive, unethical, immoral, and unscrupulous.” Earlier this year, Tong, alongside the Attorneys General of New York and New Jersey, sent a letter demanding immediate refunds for Optimum customers affected by blackouts on channels they paid extra for. Optimum agreed to a $119.5 million settlement with the state of West Virginia earlier this year over a suit stemming from thousands of consumer complaints.
“We’re forced to take action against Optimum today, and stop them from deceiving Spanish language customers, deceiving customers who want to pay a price for life, and deceiving all customers,” said Tong. “Tricking, fooling, ripping off all customers by charging a fee that has never been disclosed, that we have no choice but to pay, and that doesn’t do anything additional.”
Optimum spokesperson Raffaella Mazzella provided Inside Investigator with a statement in response to Tong’s claims, saying the company is “deeply invested in Connecticut, continuously enhancing our network, products, and customer support.” Mazzella called Tong’s new complaint, “without merit,” and boasted the company’s expansion of it’s “100% Fiber Internet network,” range of services, and recent provision of $5,000 grants to Bridgeport small businesses as examples of the company’s commitment to Connecticut.
“Optimum fully supports Connecticut’s commitment to providing residents and businesses with reliable, high-quality connectivity and exceptional customer service,” said Mazzella. “After the Attorney General’s initial complaint, the Court thoroughly reviewed the matter and dismissed several of the claims, finding the allegations to be unsubstantiated.”
Was this article helpful?
Topics on this page
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
