Could your phone plan be putting you at risk? ACCC sues telecom company over alleged exploitation
- Replies 6
Recent allegations against one of Australia’s largest telecommunications providers have sparked a major legal battle, shedding light on practices that have left many customers questioning their treatment.
What started as routine sales transactions has now evolved into a complex and troubling lawsuit, with far-reaching implications for vulnerable Australians.
The unfolding case reveals disturbing details about how some customers were allegedly exploited, sparking widespread concern about consumer protection in the industry.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) launched legal proceedings against Optus in October, accusing the telco of selling phones and mobile plans that hundreds of vulnerable customers could not afford.
The regulator claimed the misconduct occurred primarily across three Optus stores, including locations in Darwin.
The ACCC's lawsuit, which involved 429 customers, detailed allegations of unconscionable conduct by Optus employees. The majority of these cases stemmed from two stores in Darwin: Palmerston Gateway and Casuarina.
A woman with cerebral palsy and intellectual disability, for example, was allegedly signed up for 24 contracts over 15 months, including multiple phones, tablets, and smartwatches.
This person was reportedly sold devices like an iPhone 13 Pro Max, Samsung Galaxy phones, and a Huawei modem, despite having limited decision-making ability and relying solely on a disability support pension.
At the time of the 24th contract, Optus had already sent numerous notifications to her about missed payments.
The court documents also highlighted other vulnerable customers, including a homeless, deaf, and mute man who had part of his hand amputated.
He was allegedly sold a Samsung Galaxy phone, a costly mobile plan, and an accessories bundle worth $480.
The ACCC argued that the Optus staff involved should have been aware of the man’s limited use for technology, especially given his disability.
Additional cases in the court document focused on individuals with Alzheimer’s or dementia, such as a man with Alzheimer’s who collapsed in an Optus store in Victoria after struggling to cancel his contract.
His case was not resolved for over a year, and he passed away less than a year later.
The regulator also raised concerns about mobile plans sold to First Nations people who lived in remote areas with no Optus coverage.
Internal emails suggested that Optus was aware of this issue, especially after Telstra was fined $50 million for similar practices in 2021.
An Optus spokesperson expressed regret over the situation, stating that the company was deeply sorry for the affected customers and that the alleged actions were ‘unacceptable and out of step with Optus’s values’.
They clarified that the majority of misconduct had occurred at three licensee-operated stores, and staff involved had been disciplined, with some even terminated.
‘We are remediating affected customers–providing refunds, waiving outstanding debts and enabling them to keep devices,’ the spokesperson said.
‘We are working hard to fast-track any outstanding remediation as a matter of urgency.’
Optus’s new CEO, Stephen Rue, initiated an internal review to prevent further misconduct of this nature and to investigate individual cases.
The company also confirmed that its specialist care team for vulnerable customers had been given additional resources.
Sadly, this is not an isolated case. There was another instance where the ACCC took action against a telecom company amid serious allegations of misconduct.
In a previous story, we discussed how consumer protection laws are being tested by growing concerns over corporate accountability in the telecommunications industry.
Read the full article here.
Are companies doing enough to protect those with limited financial means and decision-making capacity? We’d love to hear your thoughts. Share your opinions in the comments below.
What started as routine sales transactions has now evolved into a complex and troubling lawsuit, with far-reaching implications for vulnerable Australians.
The unfolding case reveals disturbing details about how some customers were allegedly exploited, sparking widespread concern about consumer protection in the industry.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) launched legal proceedings against Optus in October, accusing the telco of selling phones and mobile plans that hundreds of vulnerable customers could not afford.
The regulator claimed the misconduct occurred primarily across three Optus stores, including locations in Darwin.
ACCC sues Optus over alleged exploitation of vulnerable customers. Image source: Pexel/Tima Miroshnichenko
The ACCC's lawsuit, which involved 429 customers, detailed allegations of unconscionable conduct by Optus employees. The majority of these cases stemmed from two stores in Darwin: Palmerston Gateway and Casuarina.
A woman with cerebral palsy and intellectual disability, for example, was allegedly signed up for 24 contracts over 15 months, including multiple phones, tablets, and smartwatches.
This person was reportedly sold devices like an iPhone 13 Pro Max, Samsung Galaxy phones, and a Huawei modem, despite having limited decision-making ability and relying solely on a disability support pension.
At the time of the 24th contract, Optus had already sent numerous notifications to her about missed payments.
The court documents also highlighted other vulnerable customers, including a homeless, deaf, and mute man who had part of his hand amputated.
He was allegedly sold a Samsung Galaxy phone, a costly mobile plan, and an accessories bundle worth $480.
The ACCC argued that the Optus staff involved should have been aware of the man’s limited use for technology, especially given his disability.
Additional cases in the court document focused on individuals with Alzheimer’s or dementia, such as a man with Alzheimer’s who collapsed in an Optus store in Victoria after struggling to cancel his contract.
His case was not resolved for over a year, and he passed away less than a year later.
The regulator also raised concerns about mobile plans sold to First Nations people who lived in remote areas with no Optus coverage.
Internal emails suggested that Optus was aware of this issue, especially after Telstra was fined $50 million for similar practices in 2021.
An Optus spokesperson expressed regret over the situation, stating that the company was deeply sorry for the affected customers and that the alleged actions were ‘unacceptable and out of step with Optus’s values’.
They clarified that the majority of misconduct had occurred at three licensee-operated stores, and staff involved had been disciplined, with some even terminated.
‘We are remediating affected customers–providing refunds, waiving outstanding debts and enabling them to keep devices,’ the spokesperson said.
‘We are working hard to fast-track any outstanding remediation as a matter of urgency.’
Optus’s new CEO, Stephen Rue, initiated an internal review to prevent further misconduct of this nature and to investigate individual cases.
The company also confirmed that its specialist care team for vulnerable customers had been given additional resources.
Sadly, this is not an isolated case. There was another instance where the ACCC took action against a telecom company amid serious allegations of misconduct.
In a previous story, we discussed how consumer protection laws are being tested by growing concerns over corporate accountability in the telecommunications industry.
Read the full article here.
Are companies doing enough to protect those with limited financial means and decision-making capacity? We’d love to hear your thoughts. Share your opinions in the comments below.
.png){kind=icon}
