My question involves a consumer law issue in the State of: California
Hello, forum. My question involves AT&T holding me to a contract after eviction. I started my second year contract in November of 2014. I went through eviction and moved out at the end of January of 2015. I put my account on hold, landed on me feet somewhere in another county, but my new place already has DSL through AT&T (shared house).
I spoke with an AT&T rep in mid-February. She said there are no special circumstance contract releases. (I personally think there should be consumer protections with documented evictions for cases like these, but I digress.) I can keep the account on hold for $5 a month until the end of my contract. Now, if I may, this seems unfair to me as well. They won't release me from a contract, but they'll allow me to pay the tiny sum of $5/mo until November? It would cost me $15/mo to terminate my contract. How does that really make any sense? I confirmed with the rep to make sure my contract would still end in November, even if I paid only $5/mo until then.
I can also keep the $5/mo plan so long as the new tenants in my old place, which there are some, don't sign up for an AT&T service. At that point, I would have to pay the $15/mo termination rate in full immediately. Now, maybe it's a waste of time to write all this out, because I'm almost sure the answer will be I'm stuck paying it because I "signed" a contract and it doesn't matter if I got evicted. And I know $5/mo isn't a lot. For me, it's the principle of the thing. I don't think it's a good practice, and I'd rather not pay $5/mo for a service I'm not using.
Is there any way out of the contract? I know it could be worse, but I just want to know if I have options.

