FedEx Overcharged Customers for Years, Sealed E-Mail Says
Stock Chart for FedEx Corp (FDX)
FedEx Corp. (FDX) has been “systematically overcharging” customers by billing businesses and government offices at higher residential rates, a company sales executive said in an internal e-mail unsealed in a lawsuit.
“I have brought this to attention of many people over the past five or six years, including more than one managing director, and no action has been taken to address it,” Alan Elam wrote in an e-mail on Aug. 2, 2011. “My belief is that we are choosing not to fix this issue because it is worth so much money to FedEx,” Elam said in a separate e-mail that day.
The e-mails were unsealed yesterday in a class-action, or group, lawsuit claiming FedEx Corp. and FedEx Corporate Services Inc. overcharged commercial and government customers as much as $3 each for millions of packages delivered. The plaintiffs, who claim violations of federal civil racketeering laws, seek three times the amount of the alleged overcharges in their lawsuit.
“We allege that FedEx has and continues to engage in a pattern of intentionally charging its customers residential delivery fees for deliveries to obviously non-residential addresses such as courthouses, government offices and banks,” Steven J. Rosenwasser, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in an interview.
FedEx, based in Memphis, Tennessee, has charged residential rates for deliveries to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Office, Bank of America Corp., Toyota Motor Credit Corp. and the National Passport Processing Center, according to the amended complaint filed yesterday in the lawsuit.
“Perhaps most telling, on at least 70 separate occasions, FedEx improperly charged a residential delivery surcharge to its customers for deliveries to FedEx’s own headquarters,” according to the complaint.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Memphis in 2011 seeking to represent a national class of consumers, also asks for an injunction barring FedEx from charging commercial customers at residential rates. The Elam e-mails were among 11 documents unsealed and attached to the amended complaint yesterday.
“These 11 documents do not tell the entire story of this case,” Sally Davenport, a FedEx spokeswoman, said in an e-mail today. “We will continue to defend these allegations in a court of law and not the media.”
FedEx customers with billing concerns can seek refunds by going online at fedex.com or by calling 1-800-GoFedEx, Davenport said. “FedEx built its reputation on award-winning customer service,” she said.
The Elam e-mails point to the company’s internal knowledge of overcharging, lawyers suing the company said. The e-mails were initially classified by FedEx as confidential and unsealed by court order yesterday.
“Defendants’ own internal documents prove that defendants have known for years that they are unlawfully charging residential surcharges when they do not apply, but have permitted the unlawful surcharges to continue because they generate substantial illicit profits,” Rosenwasser and other plaintiffs’ attorneys said in an amended complaint filed yesterday after the order.
“We believe that FedEx’s own e-mails show that the overcharges were not an accident or error, but rather an intentional decision to employ a system that overcharged customers,” Rosenwasser said yesterday in an e-mail.
Elam said he became aware of a problem in 2008, according to the e-mails. “It became clear to me at this time that we had a systemic problem that was likely causing overcharges for thousands of our customers, and that the dollar value was huge,” Elam wrote in an Aug. 12, 2011, e-mail to Daniel Mullally, FedEx senior vice president for sales.
Elam said he brought the issue to the attention of three of his superiors, including his managing director. “In conversations with each, I used the language, ‘This is a huge class-action lawsuit waiting to happen.’ None of them have ever reported back taking any action to elevate this issue,” Elam wrote.
“FedEx has been systematically overcharging our customers for services that we know we did not provide, and we have been doing so for many years,” Elam said.
In a prior e-mail attached to this string, Mullally told Elam that he didn’t know about any possible overcharging.
‘Understand the Gravity’
“Quite frankly was not aware of this but certainly I understand the gravity of the situation so let me involve Solutions, Customer Service and Billing to see what we are doing to resolve,” Mullally wrote. “Thanks for bringing to my attention.”
Chris Suhoza, vice president of solutions at FedEx, responded to Mullally and Elam: “Alan rest assured your concerns and those of others in this area have not gone unheard. We are working this customer experience issue through ...” The rest of this sentence remained redacted, or blacked out.
The case is Gokare P.C. v. Federal Express Corp., 11- cv-02131, U.S. District Court, Western District of Tennessee (Memphis).
To contact the reporter on this story: Margaret Cronin Fisk in Detroit at email@example.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at firstname.lastname@example.org