In a striking move against telemarketing abuses, a California resident has taken legal action against a home remodeling company for alleged violations of state and federal laws. Calvin Chang filed the complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, on July 26, 2024, targeting The Right Choice Home Remodeling Inc. and its owner Adi Moshe Sabag.
According to the complaint, Chang accuses The Right Choice Home Remodeling Inc. and Sabag of engaging in unlawful telemarketing practices that include making unsolicited robocalls to phone numbers listed on the National Do Not Call Registry. These actions allegedly violate several statutes including the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), Unfair Competition Law (UCL), and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). "Americans passionately disagree about many things. But they are largely united in their disdain for robocalls," Chang's complaint quotes from a Supreme Court case to emphasize the widespread frustration with such practices.
Chang claims that from 2021 onwards, he received numerous robocalls from The Right Choice Home Remodeling Inc., disrupting his daily life and work. On September 3, 2023, at 5:04 p.m., Chang received a call from a number identified as belonging to TRC Remodeling about home improvements. The caller, who identified himself as "David," offered various services including solar assessments and provided promotional codes for additional funding incentives. However, when Chang attempted to verify these details by calling back the number used by "David," he found it disconnected—indicating the use of spoofed phone numbers.
Further calls ensued with different representatives using varying caller IDs and making misleading statements about grants and promotions related to home improvement services. For instance, on September 5, 2023, another representative named "Jimmy" called from a different number claiming eligibility for solar grants that Chang later found to be false or misleading upon further investigation.
Chang alleges that these calls were made using an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS) without his prior express consent—a clear violation of TCPA regulations. He also points out that despite sending consumer notices demanding identification of the telemarketers involved, Defendants failed to respond or take remedial actions.
The plaintiff is seeking multiple forms of relief including special, general, and compensatory damages amounting to $37,000; punitive damages; attorneys' fees; costs; pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; restitution; disgorgement; and injunctive relief prohibiting further violations by the defendants.
Representing himself in this matter is Calvin Chang Esq., while the case will be presided over by judges at the Superior Court of California under Case No. #402014995.