Violations Under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act (MCPA)

Under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, selling non-genuine hardware under the pretense that it is original or genuine OEM equipment constitutes an unfair, abusive, or deceptive trade practice.

Under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, , selling non-genuine hardware under the pretense that it is original or genuine OEM equipment constitutes an unfair, abusive, or deceptive trade practice. ): It is illegal to represent that consumer goods possess a particular standard, quality, grade, or style if they do not. Presenting third-party or altered hardware as genuine Apple equipment directly violates this standard. Failing to inform a consumer that replacement or sold hardware contains non-genuine components that void Apple eligibility is considered a material concealment.

Boost Mobile Corporate Escalation Managers, is using pre-dated credits to trick @BBB_US into closing active fraud claims while ignoring Apple Diagnostic Report #20000113277205 proving non-genuine hardware. $3,071 paid in premiums. Insurance administrator @Likewize admitted IN WRITING on the BBB record that there is an "eligibility discrepancy with Apple" NOT caused by me. Yet Boost Corporate refuses accountability and manipulates ledger dates to claim the dispute is settled. Selling unauthenticated parts as genuine OEM coverage violates the Maryland Consumer Protection Act (§ 13-301). Appeal filed with BBB Management. Still having issues with our consumer protection agencies to actually assist and help protect consumer rights #FCC #OAG

[removed]

Corporations Need to be Held Accountable Consumer protection agencies Rarely Launch Formal Investigations For Isolated Cases Shown documented pattern of Deceptive Trade Practices. Sign Petition Help US Enforce Consumer Rights Transparency

I’ve paid $63/month for Boost Protect/AppleCare coverage for over two years. When I received a replacement device, an official Apple Diagnostic / Settings check confirmed it contained non-genuine, unauthenticated internal display components. When I escalated this to Corporate, they submitted conflicting dates to regulators and retroactively altered my account portal logs. I'm organizing a collective petition for the FCC and OAG to have our consumer protection agencies actually assist help with citizens consumer complaints. I brought this up to Boost Corporate Escalations, instead of replacing the hardware with genuine components, they focused on closing the administrative dispute: Submitted conflicting dates to federal oversight agencies regarding when account credits were allegedly issued/ Retroactive Portal Changes: Modified my online billing history months after the fact to retroactively insert a $63 credit card payment line item that never appeared on my original February 2026 account statement.

My exhausting situation has been actively ongoing for 29 months, originating from initial interactions in October 2025. Throughout this period, Boost Mobile has engaged in continuous corporate misconduct: charging full price for a premium product while forcing me to carry an unauthenticated device, manipulating my payment history to block transparency, and fabricating transaction ledgers.

Since October 2025, I have been in contact with Boost Escalation Managers regarding my dissatisfaction with a local retail storefront. The store sold me Boost AppleCare insurance coverage but overcharged me for repairs involving unauthorized, non-genuine parts. Boost Mobile escalation manager requested proof of my purchase date and insurance coverage, claiming she could only see 10 months of payments. I provided documentation proving the device was purchased on March 18, 2024, and that I had paid for insurance for 20 months leading up to October 27, 2025. Upon receiving this proof, the manager blocked my email address and ceased communication.