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

Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

chaseoptout.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 246 posts

Re: Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

#111

Post by dsfyu404ed »

rkhassen wrote: post #104

For me the red flag is them willing to send this letter to Chase, via snail mail at no charge to you. Nobody gives something for nothing. So I thought, why would they do this? after reading through the form, at the bottom, it looks like one of the companies, who sponsors this site, "Radvocate" seems like they are in the "class action" lawsuit business. https://myradvocate.com/ This site is about having enough potenti…

From a "consumer who wouldn't individually sue chase" perspective I see nothing wrong here.

I know many here consider this to be ideological heresy but it's possible to have a transaction where both parties come out ahead and this seems like one of those win-wins to me. They do a little work for you in exchange for putting your name on a list of people they can use in a class action, you might even get $5 or something out of it if they win.

Putting your PII into a random website should be what raises red flags here. I hope they're not storing the account numbers, or at least not storing them with the associated personal details.

Re: Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

#112

Post by toomuchtodo »

3xblah wrote: post #107
neilv wrote: post #29

Assuming that you're completely legit and utterly competent, there's still a big security problem here: it's encouraging people to put their PII and CC info into arbitrary Web sites . On top of that, it's further identifying them as both Chase CC holders and receptive to scams, qualifying them as leads for further phishing/scamming.

"And who even has stamps lying around anymore?" People who order stamps online? If the problem is writing the letter or stamps, then why not just send the user a postage-paid envelope, pre-addressed to Chase, with a generic letter that she can fill in with her personal information and deposit into the mail? You should now be wondering how this "service" can be "free". As someone else has figured out, this is a compan…

If you expect customers to print out a template, obtain postage, and mail it, your expectations are too high.

Re: Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

#113

Post by Chris_Chambers »

rkhassen wrote: post #104

For me the red flag is them willing to send this letter to Chase, via snail mail at no charge to you. Nobody gives something for nothing. So I thought, why would they do this? after reading through the form, at the bottom, it looks like one of the companies, who sponsors this site, "Radvocate" seems like they are in the "class action" lawsuit business. https://myradvocate.com/ This site is about having enough potenti…

Oh no, someone might reap a benefit from the effort they put into something.

Re: Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

#114

Post by markovbot »

rkhassen wrote: post #104

For me the red flag is them willing to send this letter to Chase, via snail mail at no charge to you. Nobody gives something for nothing. So I thought, why would they do this? after reading through the form, at the bottom, it looks like one of the companies, who sponsors this site, "Radvocate" seems like they are in the "class action" lawsuit business. https://myradvocate.com/ This site is about having enough potenti…

So the "downside" is that they might ask for your help causing more problems for Chase in the future? I didn't click the link but now I'm going to go sign up!

Re: Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

#115

Post by mandelbrotwurst »

zbruhnke wrote: post #12
yhoneycomb wrote: post #8

This seems sketchy as fuck - your website, I mean Might as well leave a box for the SSN while you're at it

Again, I wish we did not have to do this but this is what Chase is forcing customers to do. We also give customers a way to just download the form without giving us the info but then of course we can't mail it for them ... we were just trying to make this easier for customers to opt out with the shitty options we were given

Chase is not forcing their customers to give you their info.

Re: Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

#116

Post by JumpCrisscross »

mehrdadn wrote: post #96
mjkornbl wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are relying on legal opinions that the site fully complies with the ESIGN Act. That act makes electronic signatures on par with physical signatures. (Disclosure = I'm not a lawyer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Signatures_in_Globa...

Just a layman here but that seems like a misinterpretation of the statute? The idea of the statute seems to be that the government will not void, nullify, or refuse to enforce the terms of an electronic contract. It does not state that in any given contract, private parties must accept the terms signed in any form whatsoever -- that's still left as something for those people to agree on, and Chase very clearly spelle…

> the idea of the statute seems to be that the government will not void, nullify, or refuse to enforce the terms of an electronic contract

Unless Chase explicitly said wet signature, then a government court would find the electronic signature valid.

Re: Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

#117

Post by Wowfunhappy »

jasonmp85 wrote: post #44
zbruhnke wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We also give you the ability to just download the form and mail it yourself! Unfortunately Chase forces customers to mail a letter with this information on it so there's not much we can do

> there's not much we can do Open-source a script I can run locally to generate PDFs with the information your form uses.

I’d still have to mail the result. Might as well just use the paper form.

Re: Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

#118

Post by lancesells »

zbruhnke wrote: post #83
_bxg1 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh dang. So this whole thing is just a big data grab. Even if they aren't going to make fraudulent charges, that's a clear ulterior motive.

not at all! We explicity ask if you want to opt in to future communications on our form - we are NOT using them to communicate with users if they do not opt in.

So if I was to opt-out of communications does that mean you'll never upload my email address to Facebook or Google for advertising in the future?

Re: Chase did a bad thing, so we did a good thing

#120

Post by paulgb »

mehrdadn wrote: post #96
mjkornbl wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are relying on legal opinions that the site fully complies with the ESIGN Act. That act makes electronic signatures on par with physical signatures. (Disclosure = I'm not a lawyer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Signatures_in_Globa...

Just a layman here but that seems like a misinterpretation of the statute? The idea of the statute seems to be that the government will not void, nullify, or refuse to enforce the terms of an electronic contract. It does not state that in any given contract, private parties must accept the terms signed in any form whatsoever -- that's still left as something for those people to agree on, and Chase very clearly spelle…

I spent an afternoon looking into this a few weeks ago (I ran a mass opt-out campaign for Equifax a few years ago[1] and wanted to do it again for Chase) and I came to the exact same conclusion you did. I want to appreciate what’s going on here but at the same time it seems irresponsible to give people the impression that they have opted out when they haven’t.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15207151

Post reply on HN