NOS provides telecommunications services in 48 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The company conducts business under various names including:
Plaintiff's complaint asserts that the charges assessed by NOS and its related companies are improper. NOS utilized a contradictory and confusing "Call Unit" billing scheme that deceives consumers. Under the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 203, long-distance carriers are required to file and maintain a tariff with the Federal Communications Commission "(FCC") setting forth the rates, charges, classifications, regulations, and practices governing their services. The bills NOS sends to customers do not show the duration of the billed calls in minutes or seconds. Instead, the bills state the measurement of each call in "Total Call Units" or TCU's.
The complaint in this action seeks a finding that NOS violated the Communications Act by charging rates that are not set forth in a lawful tariff. On October 2, 2003, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Nevada denied NOS's motion to compel arbitration. The Court found in particular that the arbitration clause contained extremely vague language that would not support a conclusion that any consumer agreed to arbitrate claims.
If you have experienced this problem, or would like more information about the lawsuit, click here.