T-Mobile Defends Savings Claims Against Verizon Lawsuit
T-Mobile US has officially opposed Verizon’s lawsuit, which alleges that T-Mobile’s claims of over $1,000 in annual savings for customers switching from Verizon are misleading. This legal battle highlights the increasingly competitive landscape of the US wireless market and the scrutiny surrounding advertising practices.
The Core of the Dispute
Verizon argues that T-Mobile has engaged in “faulty comparative pricing,” utilizing limited-time promotional rates against Verizon’s standard pricing while overlooking Verizon’s own promotions. They also claim T-Mobile exaggerates savings and misleads consumers regarding satellite connectivity, asserting that many Verizon customers already have access to satellite service through partnerships with Apple and Skylo at no extra cost.
T-Mobile’s Strong Rebuttal
In a detailed 43-page filing, T-Mobile vehemently refuted Verizon’s claims, arguing that Verizon is attempting to suppress “literally truthful” advertising without providing evidence of consumer deception or competitive harm. T-Mobile urged the court to deny Verizon’s request for a preliminary injunction.
T-Mobile emphasized that the $1,000+ savings claim is specifically tied to its Better Value plan, which requires three or more lines and includes bundled streaming, satellite, and other benefits that Verizon either sells separately or doesn’t offer. The company pointed to Verizon’s own “Switch to Verizon” marketing campaign, which previously advertised savings of up to $420 per year using a similar online savings calculator. T-Mobile alleges Verizon removed this calculator shortly before filing the lawsuit.
“Verizon’s conduct is materially indistinguishable from what it now characterizes as false and misleading when done by a competitor,” T-Mobile stated in its filing.
No Demonstrable Harm, T-Mobile Argues
Critically, T-Mobile contends that Verizon has failed to demonstrate any irreparable harm resulting from the Better Value campaign. This includes a lack of evidence of lost market share, increased customer churn, or diverted customers. T-Mobile also disputed Verizon’s claim that it lacks a method to measure the impact of customer switching, noting that carriers routinely track these metrics.
T-Mobile concluded that Verizon has not proven falsity, deception, or material harm. They argue that both companies utilize comparative advertising and calculators to help consumers navigate complex wireless plans. Blocking T-Mobile’s advertising while allowing Verizon to continue its own would, according to T-Mobile, “deprive consumers of truthful, contextual information about price and included benefits and dull the competitive pressure that drives carriers to improve value.”
Additional Legal Challenges
This isn’t the only legal hurdle T-Mobile faces. The company is also under scrutiny regarding its Easy Switch onboarding tool, the subject of a separate lawsuit filed by AT&T in December. AT&T alleges that T-Mobile used AI-powered bots to unlawfully access and scrape customer data from its systems, even after AT&T implemented security measures to block the tool. T-Mobile reportedly repeatedly modified the tool to circumvent these protections.
The Future of Competitive Advertising in Wireless
As wireless carriers increasingly rely on bundled value propositions and aggressive advertising to attract customers in a challenging market, disputes over pricing comparisons, data access, and customer switching are likely to continue. This ongoing litigation underscores the importance of transparency and accuracy in advertising within the telecommunications industry. For more insights into the wireless industry, visit RCR Wireless News.
