Sane happened to me after paying for premium service for more than a decade.

Because the service is not provided in good faith. Maybe if enough of us write the attorney general to take action in the public interest we can get somewhere.

When I sent a complaint to the PA attorney general. 1&1 responded, saying "other service providers identified emails as spam", which of course were poorly programmed bots that false flagged emails sent to more than one recipient (which I do routinely in my business).

The attorney general's reply to me said they could not do anything in my particular case, but they could do so in the public interest if enough people are affected. So if enough of us write, they may take action.

So I wrote back to the attorney general, stating something to the effect of:

"The response from 1&1 that 'email service providers identified my emails as spam' was based on poorly programmed bots that false flagged legitimate emails I sent to more than one recipient. No specific examples were cited by 1&1, as I can prove any and all were legitimately authorized to be sent to the recipients.

Therefore, I would like to pursue this matter further in accordance with item 2 of Question 9 of your FAQs, which states: 'The Bureau May Investigate 2) fraud, misrepresentation and deception in the sale, servicing and financing of consumer goods and products. The Bureau can bring a lawsuit seeking an injunction, restitution and penalties, if it would be in the public interest.'

As you can see from these online reviews of mail.com in the following link, I am far from the only person who has been affected: https://www.sitejabber.com/reviews/mail.com.

This having been a widespread practice on the part of 1&1 affecting multitudes of consumers, I firmly believe it is in the public interest to seek such an injunction, restitution, and penalties for all whose email service was wrongfully blocked based on false accusations of spam or other spurious reasons."