NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J., March 31 /PRNewswire/ -- A class action lawsuit
was filed on Friday, March 28 against LifeLock, Inc. and its CEO Richard
"Todd" Davis by Dr. Warren Pasternack and his wife, Susan Pasternack, on
behalf of themselves as well as all other New Jersey LifeLock subscribers.
The Pasternacks allege that LifeLock misled them about the limited level of
identity protection the company provides, and failed to warn them about the
potential adverse impact those services could have on their credit
profiles.
The plaintiffs, who reside in Middlesex County, filed suit in the New
Jersey Superior Court in New Brunswick, claiming that they were the victims
of Consumer Fraud by virtue of LifeLock's deceptive advertisements. The
suit seeks to recover the money subscribers have paid to LifeLock and
prohibit the company from continuing to promote its services through its
marketing campaign.
LifeLock, which is headquartered in Tempe, Ariz., charges subscribers
$10 per month for the services it provides as "the industry leader in the
rapidly growing field of Identity Theft Protection." In fact, in its
ubiquitous marketing campaign, Davis broadcasts his own social security
number on television and radio stations across the country as testimony to
his confidence in the services LifeLock claims to provide.
According to the Complaint, however, LifeLock's popular advertisements
lull its subscribers into a false sense of security by misrepresenting the
level the protection its services provide. To illustrate this point, the
Complaint states that as a result of LifeLock's popular advertisements, CEO
Davis's identity "was stolen while he was a customer and is, upon
information and belief, presently being misappropriated by at least twenty
identity thieves."
David Paris of Marks & Klein, LLP, Red Bank, N.J., the attorney for the
Pasternacks and the proposed class, maintains that LifeLock dramatically
overstates the level of protection provided by its primary service -- the
placement and constant renewal of fraud alerts on its subscribers' credit
profiles.
"While fraud alerts may be effective in limited instances, they
certainly cannot provide the comprehensive identity protection that
LifeLock deceptively advertises," said Paris. "For instance, fraud alerts
cannot stop the use of existing account numbers, and contrary to LifeLock's
advertisements, lenders are certainly not required to contact the
subscriber before extending credit to a potential identity thief."
According to the Complaint, LifeLock also misleads subscribers by
advertising its $1 million service guarantee. "Potential LifeLock
subscribers are enticed by the 'safety net' of what appears to be a
one-million dollar insurance policy against any losses sustained as a
result of identity theft," said Paris. "In actuality, once you get beyond
the limitations and disclaimers, you find that the guarantee is limited to
fixing failures in LifeLock's services and paying third-parties to attempt
to restore subscriber losses."
Paris added that Marks & Klein plans to file similar actions in New
York, Florida, and California for violations of those states' Consumer
Protection Laws. LifeLock, which was founded in 2005, presently has
approximately 900,000 subscribers across the United States.
|
