Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: We'll pay for you to sue Equifax

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 98 posts

Re: Tell HN: We'll pay for you to sue Equifax

#61

Post by xie_alan »

inostia wrote: post #50
pavel_lishin wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically if you're an adult who lives in the US, you are affected. How do you prove this in court? "Your honor, I gave a Dark Web hacker some bitcoin and they said I was definitely affected."

The funny thing is, the Legalist form to apply here: https://www.legalist.com/equifax/#apply-form points to the Equifax page here: https://www.equifaxsecurity2017.com/potential-impact/ As far as I remember, you could enter any random information into their form and it will say you were affected. That is the proof that Legalist is asking to provide the basis for the suit.

I've had friends enter information into that form and it said they weren't affected. AFAIK the Equifax backend is complete garbage and they've been very careful to disclaim a positive match by saying your information is "potentially impacted." Seems like they have no idea of knowing/proving whether someone actually has your specific information, but can check whether your information resided at one point on the specific server/database that was compromised?

Re: Tell HN: We'll pay for you to sue Equifax

#62

Post by k3oni »

DeathRabbit wrote: post #53
k3oni wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think will come out of the class-action lawsuits and how much do you think people will get per capita after the lawyers are paid? I have a feeling that in small courts you can at least get more than that. PA for example has a max of $12k claim amount.

Oh, yes, totally agree that the class action suits will result in a sweet $15 check or something. I guess my poorly phrased lament was just in reflection that even the max payout in small claims doesn't seem like a great result given that this stuff is out there permanently. I read some stats that indicated an average of 330 hours for a person to work through fraud on their credit reports or otherwise clean up an ID…

The other way to deal with this would be to not do anything right now and exclude yourself form the class action. In case something would be to happen you have the option to sue for full face value as long as it can be proven that this hack is related or the cause, but again that is a big if.

And i'm not a lawyer just thinking out loud.

Re: Tell HN: We'll pay for you to sue Equifax

#63

Post by jellicle »

evashang wrote: post #20
spinlock wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI - when you dodge the question this way, you look as bad as equifax. What is in it for you? Do you take a percentage of the judgement? I'll probably end up paying a lawyer to advise me on the best way to get back at Equifax. But, I'm not going to do business with you because you're shady and won't disclose your interest in this case.

Hey! As you'll find on our website, we take a third of the judgment as a contingency stake, as per our usual practice.

It doesn't say that anywhere on the website. The language used is specifically vague to accommodate a wide range of fee percentages.

"Legalist funding varies from case to case, depending on your case details and our risk assessment outputs. Apply now to get a rate!"

Re: Tell HN: We'll pay for you to sue Equifax

#64

Post by jlgaddis »

DeathRabbit wrote: post #53
k3oni wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think will come out of the class-action lawsuits and how much do you think people will get per capita after the lawyers are paid? I have a feeling that in small courts you can at least get more than that. PA for example has a max of $12k claim amount.

Oh, yes, totally agree that the class action suits will result in a sweet $15 check or something. I guess my poorly phrased lament was just in reflection that even the max payout in small claims doesn't seem like a great result given that this stuff is out there permanently. I read some stats that indicated an average of 330 hours for a person to work through fraud on their credit reports or otherwise clean up an ID…

Note that you don't have to file in small-claims court. Small-claims court was established as a convenient, easier way to handle dispute of (relatively) smaller amounts.

If you feel that Equifax has caused you, say, USD $100k in damages, you can certainly file a "regular" civil suit against them and ask for that amount.

Re: Tell HN: We'll pay for you to sue Equifax

#66

Post by takeda »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #51

I thought about this, but how do you prove damages? Judges don't like you wasting their time with theoretical losses. The best I could come up with is the cost of credit monitoring ($20 a month) for life. Does anyone have recommendations for quantifying the damages? Something the judge won't toss out? Also why does this make us put in the court where we will file? Doesn't it need to be where Equifax is located, and w…

And monitoring doesn't prevent issues from happening if something happens it apparently takes 330 hours on average to fix it.

Re: Tell HN: We'll pay for you to sue Equifax

#67

Post by VectorLock »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #51

I thought about this, but how do you prove damages? Judges don't like you wasting their time with theoretical losses. The best I could come up with is the cost of credit monitoring ($20 a month) for life. Does anyone have recommendations for quantifying the damages? Something the judge won't toss out? Also why does this make us put in the court where we will file? Doesn't it need to be where Equifax is located, and w…

I think at the very least the cost of having to do a credit freeze.

That really ticks me off the most about this. These guys collect you information without your explicit permission then when one of them fucks up and that data gets you YOU HAVE TO PAY THEM TO STOP BAD THINGS FROM HAPPENING.

Re: Tell HN: We'll pay for you to sue Equifax

#70

Post by ABCLAW »

xie_alan wrote: post #59
ABCLAW wrote: post #56

For individuals considering this, note that champerty arrangements are illegal in certain jurisdictions. If you get hit for that, you're on the hook, not them. That's explicit in their ToS. Have fun, kiddos.

IANAL, but isn't champerty permitted (or not prohibited) in almost every state? I don't think there's any remotely recent precedent for state-level champerty statutes (the few that still exist) being enforced in a commercial litigation context, and I think this situation is one in which the plaintiffs (Equifax data breach victims) are already planning to file suit, thus not rising to the level of "champerty and maint…

>IANAL, but isn't champerty permitted (or not prohibited) in almost every state?

Nope.

Third party lending as a broad policy trend has certainly opened up over time, but some states still have the restriction, others have reformed it, others call it a different thing and some have abolished it.

Is the risk substantial in your specific case? Maybe not. Maybe it is. Just know there's a risk there and you're the one eating it.

Post reply on HN