The complaint alleges that Walmart placed more than thirty-three (33) calls to plaintiff’s cellular phone in less than two weeks’ time. Walmart used an automatic telephone dialing system for placing the calls and on many occasions left artificial or prerecorded voice messages on plaintiff’s phone which instructed the plaintiff to return the call at a specified number.
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act restricts the use of certain telephone equipment, specifically the use of an automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice to place non-emergency calls without prior express consent to do so. The ban on the use of automated or prerecorded telephone calls to the home of consumers was specifically instituted to protect consumers of telephone services from the intrusive, nuisance calls to their homes from telemarkerters.
The complaint alleges that Walmart knowingly and willingly violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act because the plaintiff neither granted express consent to such call nor were the calls necessary due to an emergency situation affecting the health and safety of the plaintiff. Walmart deliberately invaded the privacy of plaintiff’s home through placing the automated phone calls and violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
In addition, plaintiff, at some point, had called the number prompted in the prerecorded voice message only to be greeted with an artificial voice prompt which requested plaintiff’s Walmart credit card number. Plaintiff alleges that he did not have, nor did he ever have, a Walmart credit card. When plaintiff was finally connected to a live operator, the operator confirmed that plaintiff was not a Walmart credit card holder and was, thus, unaware why Walmart contacted plaintiff. The live operator stated plaintiff’s number would be removed from Walmart’s call list, however, only hours later Walmart called plaintiff’s cellular again.
This lawsuit alleges that Walmart violated teh TCPA by placing numerous auto generated calls to consumers cell phones in connection with Walmart credit. The plaintiff dismissed this case with prejudice as to himself individually but without prejudice to the class. This might indicate that the parties settled quietly.