 |
You will need Adobe Reader to view and print some of the files in this section.
Download a free version of Adobe Reader. |
What does this lawsuit claim?
The lawsuit alleges that Suburban Propane unfairly charges its customers excessive prices for propane, sometimes 2-3 times the prevailing market price, without disclosing its per gallon price in advance of delivery. In addition, the lawsuit alleges that Suburban Propane unlawfully charges its customers a variety of fees that are not properly disclosed, including tank pick up fees, pump out fees, restocking fees, delivery fees, regulatory fees, transportation fuel surcharges, and other fees. The lawsuit further alleges that some of these fees are unfairly designed to prevent customers from rejecting deliveries and choosing a competitor.
Have others voiced concerns about Suburban Propane?
Yes. The New York Attorney General’s Office previously found that the company’s failure to provide notice to customers before implementing tank rental fees violated state law, and entered into a settlement with Suburban Propane in June of 2009 regarding these fees (NY Attorney General, June 16, 2009). The Vermont Attorney General’s Office also has had concerns about Suburban Propane’s business practices, and entered into a settlement with the company in June of 2008, requiring it to reimburse customers who were wrongfully charged tank removal fees (Vermont Fuel.com, June 20, 2008). And numerous news outlets have run stories shining a light on Suburban Propane’s business practices. A sampling of these stories are shown below:
- Times Herald-Record, Middletown, NY, June 5, 2010
- WRGB-CBS 6, Albany, NY, February 23, 2010
- Ithaca Journal, Ithaca, NY, April 21, 2010
- The Union Democrat, Sonora, CA, February 16, 2010
- WSYR 9, Syracuse, NY, December 29, 2008
- WSYR 9, Syracuse, NY, January 14, 2010
- Sacramento Bee, Sacramento, CA, March 17, 2009
Who is in the proposed class?
The lawsuit is being brought on behalf of a proposed nationwide class consisting of “all of Suburban Propane’s residential customers in the United States who were charged for propane or propane-related services or equipment at any time on or after May 17, 2004, and were not employed by Suburban Propane at the time they incurred such charges.” In the alternative, the named plaintiffs seek to represent separate statewide classes of Suburban Propane’s customers in their home states.
Has this lawsuit been certified as a class action?
Not at this time. Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs class actions in federal courts. The Court has not yet decided whether to allow this lawsuit to proceed as a class action under this rule. At an appropriate time, we intend to file a motion with the Court asking it to certify the lawsuit as a class action. The Complaint alleges that treatment of the lawsuit as a class action is appropriate for the following reasons:
- There are thousands of individuals in the proposed class
- There are facts and legal issues that are common to each member of the proposed class
- The common legal questions predominate over any individual issues that may be unique to particular customers
- The named plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the members of the proposed class
- The named plaintiffs and the lawyers will adequately represent the proposed class
- The company acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the proposed class
- Prosecution of separate actions by or against individual members of the proposed class would create a risk of inconsistent outcomes
- A class action will be more efficient than many individual lawsuits, and will provide members of the proposed class a chance of redress.
What are the plaintiffs asking for?
The plaintiffs are seeking a judicial declaration that Suburban propane violated the law, an injunction preventing Suburban Propane from engaging in future legal violations, and monetary relief for Suburban Propane’s alleged prior violations. Among other things, Plaintiffs seek reimbursement of all unlawful or excessive charges, statutory damages, treble damages, and civil penalties as allowed by statute, and all costs and attorneys fees incurred in connection with the lawsuit.
Is there any money available now?
No. The Court has not yet decided whether the plaintiffs’ claims are valid or whether the case may proceed as a class action.
What are people saying about the lawsuit?
The lawsuit is already attracting media coverage. Click on the following links for stories:
- WSYR 9, Syracuse, NY, May 19, 2010
- Ithaca Journal, Ithaca, NY, May 28, 2010
- Times Herald-Record, Middletown, NY, June 15, 2010
- Times Herald-Record, Middletown, NY July 13, 2010
What is the status of the case?
The lawsuit was filed on May 17, 2010, and on July 12, 201, we filed an Amended Complaint asserting additional claims against Suburban Propane. The Court has not yet set a date for trial. The case has been assigned to The Honorable Jose L. Linares, with the following case number: 2:10-cv-02548.
Can I help?
Yes! As part of our investigatory efforts, we are in the process of speaking with other Suburban Propane customers, in addition to the named plaintiffs. If you believe that you were charged excessive or unfair propane prices or fees that were not properly disclosed in advance, we would be interested in hearing from you. You may contact us toll free at 1-877-448-0492, write to us at Nichols Kaster, PLLP, 4600 IDS Center, 80 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402, or email our clerk Jon Sandquist at jsandquist@nka.com. You may also check this site for periodic updates.
How can I learn more?
You may contact us toll free at 1-877-448-0492, write to us at Nichols Kaster, PLLP, 4600 IDS Center, 80 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402, or email our clerk Jon Sandquist at jsandquist@nka.com. You may also check this site for periodic updates.
Disclaimer
The materials on this site are provided for informational purposes only and do
not constitute legal advice. This information may not be accurate, complete, or
current. We make no warranty, express or implied, about the reliability or
accuracy of the information on this web site or any other web site to which
it is linked. None of the information (including any posted information) at
this web site which relates to or incorporates federal income tax information
was intended or written for anyone to rely upon for any purpose, including
avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code. Only formal, written tax
opinions in compliance with Internal Revenue Service standards may form the
basis of such reliance. Accordingly, none of the information at this web site
can be used to avoid penalties under the Internal Revenue Code.
Viewing this web site is not, alone, intended to create an attorney-client
relationship between you and Nichols Kaster, PLLP and you should
not act or rely on any information in this site without seeking the advice of
an attorney.
If you communicate with us by e-mail, please remember that internet e-mail is
not secure and you should avoid sending sensitive or confidential internet
e-mail messages unless they are adequately encrypted. Sending us an e-mail
message will not make you a client of Nichols Kaster, PLLP.
Nichols Kaster, PLLP has tried to comply with all legal and
ethical requirements in compiling this web site. We do not want to represent
clients based on their review of any portion of this web site that does not
comply with legal or ethical requirements. This web site might contain links to
other resources on the Internet. Those links are to help you identify and
locate other resources on the Internet. The links are not intended to state or
imply that Nichols Kaster, PLLP sponsors or is affiliated or
associated in any way with the information at those other Web sites.
To the extent the State Bar Rules in your jurisdiction require us to designate a
principal office and/or single attorney responsible for this site, Nichols Kaster, PLLP designates Donald H. Nichols.
|